Hi Anders,
I forgot to mention that we already pushed fix for #1819, though the
issue is solved by floated patch of #517. Now, this patch should be on top of
#517. So, we need to have some where #517 and starts toping on it.
That's my point and it is good for all of us.
Sorry for the inconvenience if it is causing.
Thanks
-Nagu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nagendra Kumar
> Sent: 19 May 2016 16:27
> To: Anders Widell; Gary Lee
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] amfnd: add preliminary support for BAD
> OM handles [#1833]
>
> Hi Anders,
>
> Yes, but it need to go as per sequence. If we
> have #517 (a
> separate thread already created), you can simply change the code for
> BAD_HANDLE.
>
> When I have to push #517, then I need to again refactor it (for making
> changes in a separate thread).
>
>
>
> Neither #517 nor #1833 fixes all problems mentioned in #1607/9, we are just
> progressing towards it.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> -Nagu
>
>
>
> From: Anders Widell [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 19 May 2016 16:13
> To: Gary Lee; Nagendra Kumar
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; opensaf-
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1 of 1] amfnd: add preliminary support for BAD OM
> handles [#1833]
>
>
>
> I agree with Gary that the full solution (outlined in tickets [#1607] and
> [#1609]) is too big to introduce in a maintenance release (OpenSAF 5.0.1). It
> will have to wait until the next major release.
>
> regards,
> Anders Widell
>
> On 05/19/2016 12:08 PM, Gary Lee wrote:
>
> That is why I tried to restrict the number of retries. Handling bad handle is
> different to me between OI and OM.
>
> I think what you did in #517 is great. But it only covers a subset of the
> places
> where IMM reads occur.
>
> I don't see a feasible way of fixing this fully with threads with the
> restricted
> time and amount of code changes we can make for 5.0?
>
> On 19 May 2016 7:57 PM, Nagendra Kumar HYPERLINK
> "mailto:[email protected]";<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Gary,
>
> Yes, but this will make Amfnd to hang and will get created
> the same
> problem as mentioned in #517. Please check Amfd handling the
> BAD_HANDLE in a separate thread and the tickets Ander W has mentioned.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> -Nagu
>
>
>
> From: Gary Lee [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 19 May 2016 15:21
> To: Nagendra Kumar
> Cc: HYPERLINK
> "mailto:[email protected]"[email protected];
> HYPERLINK "mailto:[email protected]"opensaf-
> [email protected]; HYPERLINK
> "mailto:[email protected]"[email protected];
> HYPERLINK
> "mailto:[email protected]"[email protected]
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 1 of 1] amfnd: add preliminary support for BAD OM
> handles [#1833]
>
>
>
> Hi Nagu
>
> I think we definitely should for the next release, but what about 5.0?
>
> Gary
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who bring
> their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
> restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the apps
> on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
> _______________________________________________
> Opensaf-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
