HiHoang,
>>The replica IMM objects are not created after opening a checkpoint in
following scenario:
1. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE
2. Unlink the checkpoint ( the checkpoint is still being used)
3. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE with same name
as the on in 1.
>>After 3. although the checkpoint is opened successfully, the replica
IMM objects are not created.
As I Know CKPT specification doesn't say , if checkpoint is reopened
with same name
which is currently in UN-linked state and not yet expired/cleaned an
new instance should be created .
So we can always re-use the existing UN-linked resources by just simply
removing UN-link flag,
what is your opinion?
-AVM
On 1/19/2017 12:37 PM, Hoang Vo wrote:
> Summary: cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655]
> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1655
> Peer Reviewer(s): [email protected]; [email protected]
> Pull request to: [email protected]
> Affected branch(es): default
> Development branch: default
>
> --------------------------------
> 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):
> ---------------------------------------------
> Rebase patch to latest folder structure, do not change any source code inside
> Patched after 1765
>
> changeset 6ffeaa4fbf2e352bd42a4bba160c4c593efcf749
> Author: Hoang Vo <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 13:59:09 +0700
>
> Problem:
> -------- The replica IMM objects are not created after opening a
> checkpoint
> in following scenario:
>
> 1. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE 2. Unlink the
> checkpoint ( the checkpoint is still being used) 3. Open a checkpoint
> with
> flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE with same name as the one in 1.
>
> After step 3. although the checkpoint is opened successfully, the
> replica
> IMM objects are not created.
>
> The problem happens because the CPD does not delete relating nodes from
> ckpt_reploc_tree when it unlinks the checkpoint in step 2.
>
> Solution:
> --------- The solution is to remove replica location node of that
> checkpoint
> from the ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking the checkpoint.
>
>
> Complete diffstat:
> ------------------
> src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_db.c | 4 ++++
> src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_proc.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
>
> Testing Commands:
> -----------------
> Follow testing step specified in the ticket 1655
>
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --------------------------
> Refer the ticket 1655 description for expected result
>
> Conditions of Submission:
> -------------------------
> ACK from maintainer
>
> 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.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
