Summary: osaf: During adminrestart of node directors, before re-instantiating 
kill them [#1326]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1326
Peer Reviewer(s): AndersW, Ramesh - General aspects. HansN,Nagendra, Praveen 
from AMF perspective
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): opensaf-4.5.x, 4.6.x, default
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):
---------------------------------------------
Since this is a common code for all opensaf components.
A general review from AndersW and Ramesh would be good.
And, review from an AMF component perspective by the AMF maintainers.

changeset 41c5c64465057b2fe896ead1d931925ba1077d0f
Author: Mathivanan N.P.<[email protected]>
Date:   Wed, 06 May 2015 20:11:05 +0530

        osaf: During adminrestart of node directors, before re-instantiating 
kill
        them [#1326].
        The command $ amf-adm restart <DN name> is one way of
        administratively restarting an AMF component. As apart of this admin
        operation, AMF sends the component terminate callback to the PI 
components.
        It is up to the component to release all its resources and respond to 
AMF
        the status of its self-termination before exiting (typically) the 
process
        itself. After receiving the response from the component, AMF invokes the
        instantiation script of the component. During this time, it is possible 
that
        the previously running instance of the process (of this component) has 
not
        yet exited. This situation when there is already a running 
daemon/process
        and now a new instantiation is being attempted can cause the 
instantiation
        script to return failure. This patch creates temporary term_state_file 
from
        inside the component terminate callback of the node directors. In the
        instantiation scripts, a check is done to distinguish a a fresh
        instantiation versus an instantiation after a termination. If the
        term_state_file exists then it means, its an instantiation after
        termination. If so, just attempt to kill (using killproc) the process 
again
        before calling start_daemon.

        Note: There has been mention of using start_daemon -f option which will
        create another copy of the daemon if the previous daemon is still 
running.
        Using this option may not be ideal for us as it can create any 
inconsistency
        between the two daemons when using any resources and also, there is no 
proof
        or documentation of start_daemon -f working successfully. This is even 
more
        significant given that some distros are really slow in becoming LSB
        compliant, particularly the start_daemon and the likes of it.


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_amf.c              |  14 +++++++++++++-
 osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/scripts/osaf-ckptnd.in  |  13 +++++++++++++
 osaf/services/saf/glsv/glnd/glnd_amf.c              |  14 ++++++++++++++
 osaf/services/saf/glsv/glnd/scripts/osaf-lcknd.in   |  13 +++++++++++++
 osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd_amf.c           |  11 +++++++++++
 osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/scripts/osaf-immnd.in |  18 ++++++++++++++++++
 osaf/services/saf/mqsv/mqnd/mqnd_amf.c              |  11 +++++++++++
 osaf/services/saf/mqsv/mqnd/scripts/osaf-msgnd.in   |  13 +++++++++++++
 osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfnd/scripts/osaf-smfnd.in |  13 +++++++++++++
 osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfnd/smfnd_amf.c           |  11 +++++++++++
 10 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-----------------
amf-adm restart <DN name of opensaf Node director component>

Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
There should not be any error observed during re-instantiation
of that component.
NOte: The test may be mixedup with combination of 
amf-adm restart <DN name>
and
kill -9 <pid>
commands.

Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from AndersW/Ramesh.

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.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to