Summary: AMFND: Ensure su operational message synchronizes with component
failover sequence [#2233]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 2233
Peer Reviewer(s): AMF devs
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): all
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):
---------------------------------------------
<<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>>
changeset 092fac5ca734f001552e5d6abe18391aaec42bd0
Author: Minh Hon Chau <minh.c...@dektech.com.au>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:08:46 +1100
AMFND: Ensure su operational message synchronizes with component
failover
sequence [#2233]
In case component failover, faulty component will be terminated. When
the
reinstantiation is done, amfnd will send su_oper_message (enabled) to
amfd
which is running along with component failover. In the reported
problem, if
su_oper_message (enabled) comes to amfd before the quiesced assignment
response (as part of component failover sequence) comes to amfd, then
this
quiesced assignment response is ignored, thus component failover will
not
finish.
The problem is in function susi_success_sg_realign with act=5, state=3,
amfd
always assumes su having faulty component is OUT_OF_SERVICE. This
assumption
is true in most of the time when su_oper_message (enabled) comes a
little
later than quiesced assignment response. In fact the su_oper_message
(enabled) is not designed as part of component failover sequence, thus
it
can come any time during the failover. If amfd is getting a bit busier
with
RTA update then the faulty component has enough to reinstiantiate so
that
amfnd sends su_oper_message (enabled) before quiesced assignment
response,
the reported problem will be seen.
This patch hardens the component failover sequence by ensuring the
su_oper_message (enabled) to be sent after su completes to remove
assignment. This approach comes from the similarity in su failover,
where
the su_oper_message (enabled) is sent in repair phase.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
src/amf/amfnd/avnd_su.h | 1 +
src/amf/amfnd/clc.cc | 3 ---
src/amf/amfnd/di.cc | 12 +++++++++++-
src/amf/amfnd/susm.cc | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
4 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
- Testing normal component failover
- Testing the scenario reported in ticket
- Testing component failover during headless
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
All tests should pass
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
ack from reviewer
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
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
