Summary: cpsv: raised track callback for non-collo ckpt section create/delete
[#1305]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1305
Peer Reviewer(s): Srikanth/Ramesh
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): 4.5 4.6 4.7
Development branch: default
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services n
OpenSAF services y
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
changeset d0faddaa78d14dc6d57e97cc70e18016eb2e57fd
Author: A V Mahesh <mahesh.va...@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 14:56:34 +0530
cpsv: raised track callback for non-collo ckpt section create/delete
[#1305]
In current implementation of non-collocated checkpoint, If a checkpoint
is opened for the first time by an application residing on a payload
blade,
the replicas will be created on the local payload blade and both the
system
controller nodes. In this case, the replica residing on the payload
blade is
designated as active replica. If a non-collocated checkpoint is opened
for
the first time by an application residing on the system controller
nodes,
the replica will be created only on the system controller blade. In this
case, this replica on a system controller node will act as the active
replica. If another application opens the same checkpoint from a payload
node, the checkpoint service will not create the replica on that node.
Bug : Based on current implementation for NON_COLLOCATED CHECKPOINT
application , if saCkptCheckpointTrackCallback is registered, for
saCkptCheckpointWrite() & saCkptSectionOverwrite() TrackCallback are
getting
invoked properly , but for saCkptSectionCreate( With Initial Data) &
saCkptSectionDelete() the TrackCallback is not getting invoked.
Fix : Now trackcallback will be raised even the replica is NOT residing
on
the payload blade for saCkptSectionCreate( With Initial Data) &
saCkptSectionDelete() .
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_evt.c | 80
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
1 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Find test Reader & Writer applications attached ticket
1305_Reader.c 1305_Writer.c
Compile application on :
SC-1# gcc 1305_Writer.c -o Writer -lSaCkpt
SC-2# gcc 1305_Reader.c -o Reader -lSaCkpt
PL-3# gcc 1305_Reader.c -o Reader -lSaCkpt
PL-$# gcc 1305_Reader.c -o Reader -lSaCkpt
Run application on and with for 30 seconds :
SC-1# ./Writer
SC-2# ./Reader
PL-3# ./Reader
PL-4# ./Reader
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
For saCkptSectionCreate() & saCkptSectionDelete() you will get
AppCkptUpdateCallback on SC-2 , PL-3 & PL-4 Reader application
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
<<HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC>>
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
