Summary: amfd: reset ng op params after performing sufailover [#1279]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): <<IF ANY LIST THE #>>
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans N., Nagendra.
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): Default and 4.6
Development branch: <<IF ANY GIVE THE REPO URL>>
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services y
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
changeset 4d2272a3aa68f7894cdecbd56a33068c9f9957a2
Author: praveen.malv...@oracle.com
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 12:02:36 +0530
amfd: reset ng op params after performing sufailover [#1279]
If lock/shutdown operation on a nodegroup is in progress and component
faults with sufailover recovery while handling quiesced/quiescing
callback,
then two problems are obserbed in case of 2N application: 1)If both the
active and standby assignments are part of nodegroup then lock operation
succeeds but unlock does not lead to assignment in any SU. Here there
is no
problem in shutdown opreation. 2)If active assignment is in the
nodegroup
and standby assignment is outside the nodegroup then nodegroup admin
state
sticks to SHUTTING_DOWN but operation succeeds. Since ng admin state is
not
locked, unlock operation is rejected by AMF. Here there is no problem
with
lock operation.
AMF is resetting nodegroup params before failover of SU. In case 1, SG
was
not stable while AMF tries to reset the sg admin state.So internally SG
remained it locked state. When user tries to unlock the ng, operation
succeeds but no assignment occurs as SG is locked internally. In case
2, AMF
tries to mark the node and ng from SHUTTING_DOWN to locked before
sufailover. Before sufailover su still has SIs assigned to it in
quiescing
state. Because of this node is not marked locked ans so also ng.
In sufailover, AMF deletes all the assignment and marks the node locked
and
sg becomes stable. So after sufailover processing, if AMF performs ng
related activities it will set things in proper state. Patch ensures
this.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/sgproc.cc | 10 +++++-----
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
With 2N app without Sideps:
1)Tested shutdown and unlock on ng when both active and stanby assignments are
in nodegroup and when only active assignment is in the nodegroup.During
quiescing callback
component was made to fault with sufailover recovery.
1)Tested lock and unlock on ng when both active and stanby assignments are
in nodegroup and when only active assignment is in the nodegroup.During
quiesced callback
component was made to fault with sufailover recovery.
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
all the four cases passed with ng in proper state.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from reviewers.
Arch Built Started Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips n n
mips64 n n
x86 n n
x86_64 y y
powerpc n n
powerpc64 n n
Reviewer Checklist:
-------------------
[Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!]
Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries):
___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries
that need proper data filled in.
___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push.
___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header
___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable.
___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text.
___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits.
___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files
(i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc)
___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests.
Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing.
___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed.
___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes
like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs.
___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other
cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits.
___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is
too much content into a single commit.
___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc)
___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent;
Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled.
___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded
commits, or place in a public tree for a pull.
___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication
of what has changed between each re-send.
___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the
comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review.
___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, email etc)
___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the
the threaded patch review.
___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results
for in-service upgradability test.
___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series
do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
