Hi Vu, On 2/23/2017 3:13 PM, A V Mahesh wrote: > > Not sure what are other change compare to V7 to V9 , New problems got > introduced > > Both nodes SC-1 & SC-2 ( with 2258_v9.patch ) , trying bring up both > SC`s simple node bringup , > > SC-2 going for reboot with following : > > ======================================================================================================================================== > > > > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osaflogd[29988]: NO LOGSV_DATA_GROUPNAME not found > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osaflogd[29988]: NO LOG root directory is: > "/var/log/opensaf/saflog" > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osaflogd[29988]: NO LOG data group is: "" > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osafimmnd[29978]: NO Implementer (applier) > connected: 16 (@safAmfService2020f) <127, 2020f> > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osaflogd[29988]: NO LGS_MBCSV_VERSION = 7 > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osaflogd[29988]: WA FAILED: > ncs_patricia_tree_add, client_id 0 > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osafamfnd[30028]: NO Assigned > 'safSi=SC-2N,safApp=OpenSAF' STANDBY to > 'safSu=SC-2,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osaflogd[29988]: ER Exiting with message: Could > not create new client > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osafamfnd[30028]: NO > 'safSu=SC-2,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' component restart probation timer > started (timeout: 60000000000 ns) > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osafamfnd[30028]: NO Restarting a component of > 'safSu=SC-2,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' (comp restart count: 1) > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osafamfnd[30028]: NO > 'safComp=LOG,safSu=SC-2,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' faulted due to > 'errorReport' : Recovery is 'componentRestart' > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 opensafd[29908]: ER Service LOGD has unexpectedly > crashed. Unable to continue, exiting > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osafamfd[30018]: exiting for shutdown > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osafamfnd[30028]: ER AMFD has unexpectedly > crashed. Rebooting node > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 osafamfnd[30028]: Rebooting OpenSAF NodeId = > 131599 EE Name = , Reason: AMFD has unexpectedly crashed. Rebooting > node, OwnNodeId = 131599, SupervisionTime = 60 > Feb 23 15:05:32 SC-2 opensaf_reboot: Rebooting local node; timeout=60 > Feb 23 15:06:04 SC-2 syslog-ng[1180]: syslog-ng starting up; > version='2.0.9' > > ======================================================================================================================================== > > Some times :
======================================================================================================================================== Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafrded[3858]: NO RDE role set to STANDBY Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafrded[3858]: NO Peer up on node 0x2010f Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafrded[3858]: NO Got peer info request from node 0x2010f with role ACTIVE Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafrded[3858]: NO Got peer info response from node 0x2010f with role ACTIVE Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafimmd[3877]: NO MDS event from svc_id 24 (change:3, dest:13) Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafimmd[3877]: NO MDS event from svc_id 24 (change:5, dest:13) Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafimmd[3877]: NO MDS event from svc_id 24 (change:5, dest:13) Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafimmd[3877]: NO MDS event from svc_id 25 (change:3, dest:565217560625168) Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafimmd[3877]: NO MDS event from svc_id 25 (change:3, dest:564114674417680) Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osaflogd[3898]: NO LOGSV_DATA_GROUPNAME not found Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osaflogd[3898]: NO LOG root directory is: "/var/log/opensaf/saflog" Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osaflogd[3898]: NO LOG data group is: "" Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafimmnd[3888]: NO Implementer (applier) connected: 15 (@safAmfService2020f) <127, 2020f> Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osaflogd[3898]: NO LGS_MBCSV_VERSION = 7 Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osaflogd[3898]: ER Exiting with message: Client attributes differ Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafamfnd[3938]: NO 'safSu=SC-2,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' component restart probation timer started (timeout: 60000000000 ns) Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafamfnd[3938]: NO Restarting a component of 'safSu=SC-2,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' (comp restart count: 1) Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 osafamfnd[3938]: NO 'safComp=LOG,safSu=SC-2,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' faulted due to 'errorReport' : Recovery is 'componentRestart' Feb 23 15:15:19 SC-2 opensafd[3818]: ER Service LOGD has unexpectedly crashed. Unable to continue, exiting Feb 23 15:15:20 SC-2 osafamfd[3928]: exiting for shutdown Feb 23 15:15:20 SC-2 osafamfnd[3938]: ER AMFD has unexpectedly crashed. Rebooting node Feb 23 15:15:20 SC-2 osafamfnd[3938]: Rebooting OpenSAF NodeId = 131599 EE Name = , Reason: AMFD has unexpectedly crashed. Rebooting node, OwnNodeId = 131599, SupervisionTime = 60 Feb 23 15:15:20 SC-2 osafimmnd[3888]: NO Implementer locally disconnected. Marking it as doomed 15 <127, 2020f> (@safAmfService2020f) Feb 23 15:15:20 SC-2 osafimmnd[3888]: NO Implementer disconnected 15 <127, 2020f> (@safAmfService2020f) Feb 23 15:15:20 SC-2 opensaf_reboot: Rebooting local node; timeout=60 ======================================================================================================================================== > > -AVM > > > On 2/23/2017 2:20 PM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >> Hi Mahesh, >> >> This is the latest code has been rebased on the latest changeset. >> >> Note that, in the attached patch, I have included one more dependency, >> that is on base::Hash() function, the patch sent by Anders [#2266] >> >> Please review the patch, then comment if any. Thanks. >> >> Regards, Vu >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 2:03 PM >>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; >>> lennart.l...@ericsson.com; canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au >>> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> Subject: Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: add >> alternative >>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4 >>> >>> Hi Vu, >>> >>> Now we are now able to proceed further with V7 `2258_v7.patch` in >>> service upgraded working fine, >>> because of Encode/decode changes done in V7 patch. >>> >>> But we have another small test case issue (/usr/bin/logtest 5 17 >>> Segmentation fault), >>> once we resolve this also, we can conclude that all the basic >>> functionality is working, >>> then you can re-publish the V7 patch ( if change occurred in Lennart >>> #2258 V2 please do publish that as well ) >>> so that I can go for CODE review. >>> >>> Steps to reproduce the test case issue : >>> >>> 1) Bring up old node as Active ( with out `2258_v7.patch` ) >>> 2) Bring-up new node as Standby ( with `2258_v7.patch` ) >>> 3) Do `amf-adm si-swap safSi=SC-2N,safApp=OpenSAF` >>> 4) Run `/usr/bin/logtest 5 17 ` on new Active (because of si-swap ) >>> >>> Note : both nodes has the new XLM attributes populated . >>> >>> ============================================================== >>> ===================== >>> >>> gdb /usr/bin/logtest >>> (gdb) r 5 >>> >>> 16 PASSED CCB Object Modify, change root directory. Path >>> exist. OK; >>> Detaching after fork from child process 13797. >>> Set values Fail >>> [New Thread 0x7ffff7ff7b00 (LWP 13801)] >>> [New Thread 0x7ffff7fc4b00 (LWP 13802)] >>> >>> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. >>> 0x00005555555688ea in read_and_compare.isra.7 () at >>> src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c:1891 >>> 1891 src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c: No such file or directory. >>> in src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c >>> (gdb) bt >>> #0 0x00005555555688ea in read_and_compare.isra.7 () at >>> src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c:1891 >>> #1 0x0000555555568a4b in check_logRecordDestinationConfigurationAdd () >>> at src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c:1941 >>> #2 0x0000555555571b05 in run_test_case () >>> #3 0x0000555555571feb in test_run () >>> #4 0x000055555555bfad in main () at src/log/apitest/logtest.c:569 >>> (gdb) >>> >>> ============================================================== >>> ===================== >>> >>> >>> -AVM >>> >>> On 2/23/2017 11:44 AM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >>>> Hi Mahesh, >>>> >>>> Maybe it was broken when transmitting. I zipped to a tar file. Please >> try it >>>> one more. >>>> >>>> Regards, Vu >>>> >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] >>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 12:54 PM >>>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; >>>>> lennart.l...@ericsson.com; canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au >>>>> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>> Subject: Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: add >>>> alternative >>>>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4 >>>>> >>>>> Hi Vu, >>>>> >>>>> On 2/23/2017 10:20 AM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >>>>>> Hi Mahesh, >>>>>> >>>>>> Can you try with 2258_v7.patch I just sent to you? >>>>> I striped changeset: 8610 of today's latest staging ( `hg strip >>>>> 8610` which removed log: implement SaLogFilterSetCallbackT and >>>>> version >>>>> handling [#2146]) >>>>> and try to apply your `2258_v7.patch`, it says `malformed patch at >>>>> line >>>>> 3324`. >>>>> >>>>> -AVM >>>>>> I have pulled the latest code on OpenSAF 5.1 branch, re-created the >>>> cluster. >>>>>> And it works with the case old active SC-1 (OpenSAF 5.1) and new >>> standby >>>>>> SC-2 (with 2258_v7.patch included in). >>>>>> >>>>>> To apply 2258_v7.patch, please do remove the just pushed ticket >>>>>> "log: >>>>>> implement SaLogFilterSetCallbackT and version handling [#2146]" , >>>>>> I have not rebased the code on that yet. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, Vu >>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] >>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 11:45 AM >>>>>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; >>>>>>> lennart.l...@ericsson.com; canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au >>>>>>> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: add >>>>>> alternative >>>>>>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Vu/Lennart, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In broad WITHOUT the #2258 patch, the same code/setup working fine >>>>> with >>>>>>> 2 sc node (staging changeset: 8609 ), >>>>>>> as soon as we apply `2258_v5.patch` V5 patch on staging (changeset: >>>>>>> 8609 ) that you have provided yesterday, >>>>>>> on one sc node and try to bring up that in to cluster (in-service >> test) >>>>>>> we are observing the issue of new node (with #2258 patch) not >>>>>>> joining >>>>>>> cluster. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>> ==================================================== >>>>>>> eb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 osafimmnd[15279]: NO Implementer (applier) >>>>>>> connected: 15 (@safAmfService2010f) <127, 2010f> >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 osaflogd[15289]: NO LOGSV_DATA_GROUPNAME >>>>> not >>>>>>> found >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 osaflogd[15289]: NO LOG root directory is: >>>>>>> "/var/log/opensaf/saflog" >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 osaflogd[15289]: NO LOG data group is: "" >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 osaflogd[15289]: NO LGS_MBCSV_VERSION = 7 >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 osafamfnd[15329]: NO Assigned >>>>>>> 'safSi=SC-2N,safApp=OpenSAF' STANDBY to 'safSu=SC- >>>>>>> 1,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 opensafd: OpenSAF(5.1.M0 - ) services >>> successfully >>>>>>> started >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 osafamfnd[15329]: NO >>>>>>> 'safComp=LOG,safSu=SC-1,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' faulted due to >>>>>>> 'avaDown' : Recovery is 'nodeFailfast' >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 osafamfnd[15329]: ER >>>>>>> safComp=LOG,safSu=SC-1,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF Faulted due >>>>>>> to:avaDown >>>>>>> Recovery is:nodeFailfast >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 osafamfnd[15329]: Rebooting OpenSAF NodeId = >>>>>>> 131343 >>>>>>> EE Name = , Reason: Component faulted: recovery is node failfast, >>>>>>> OwnNodeId = 131343, SupervisionTime = 60 >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 opensaf_reboot: Rebooting local node; >>> timeout=60 >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:02:00 SC-1 osafimmnd[15279]: NO Implementer (applier) >>>>>>> connected: 16 (@OpenSafImmReplicatorB) <144, 2010f> >>>>>>> Feb 23 10:01:59 SC-1 opensaf_reboot: Rebooting local node; >>> timeout=60 >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>> ==================================================== >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So it is evident that in-service upgrade part code of this need >>>>>>> to be >>>>>>> corrected. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please see my comments as [AVM] and let me know if you need some >>>>> traces >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you're planing to prepare new V6 patch , please do prepare on >>>>>>> top >> of >>>>>>> today's latest staging. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2/23/2017 9:33 AM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Mahesh, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have done in-service upgrade/downgrade with following cases: >>>>>>>> 1) New Active SC-1 (OpenSAF 5.2 with the attached patch) + old >>> standby >>>>>>> SC-2 >>>>>>>> (OpenSAF 5.1) >>>>>>>> --> Work fine >>>>>>> [AVM] This is not a practical use cause of in-service upgrade , we >> can >>>>>>> ignore this test further >>>>>>>> 2) Old Active SC-1 (OpenSAF 5.1) + new standby SC-2 (with or >>>>>>>> without >>>>>>>> attached patch) >>>>>>>> --> SC-2 is restarted & not able to join the cluster. >>>>>>> [AVM] This use cause/flow is we do get in in-service upgrade , >>>>>>> so we >>>>>>> need to address this. >>>>>>>> I got following messages in syslog: >>>>>>>> Feb 23 09:32:42 SC-2 user.notice opensafd: OpenSAF(5.2.M0 - >>>>>>>> 8529:b5addd36e45d:default) services successfully started >>>>>>>> Feb 23 09:32:43 SC-2 local0.warn osafntfimcnd[701]: WA >>>>>>> ntfimcn_imm_init >>>>>>>> saImmOiImplementerSet() returned SA_AIS_ERR_TIMEOUT (5) >>>>>>>> Feb 23 09:32:45 SC-2 local0.warn osafntfimcnd[701]: WA >>>>>>> ntfimcn_imm_init >>>>>>>> saImmOiImplementerSet() returned SA_AIS_ERR_TIMEOUT (5) >>>>>>>> Feb 23 09:32:47 SC-2 local0.warn osafntfimcnd[701]: WA >>>>>>> ntfimcn_imm_init >>>>>>>> saImmOiImplementerSet() returned SA_AIS_ERR_TIMEOUT (5) >>>>>>>> Feb 23 09:32:49 SC-2 local0.warn osafntfimcnd[701]: WA >>>>>>> ntfimcn_imm_init >>>>>>>> saImmOiImplementerSet() returned SA_AIS_ERR_TIMEOUT (5) >>>>>>>> Feb 23 09:32:50 SC-2 local0.err osafmsgnd[592]: ER >>>>>>> saImmOiImplementerSet >>>>>>>> FAILED:5 >>>>>>>> Feb 23 09:32:50 SC-2 local0.err osafmsgnd[592]: ER >>>>>>> saImmOiImplementerSet >>>>>>>> FAILED:5 >>>>>>>> Feb 23 09:32:50 SC-2 local0.notice osafamfnd[496]: NO >>>>>>>> 'safSu=SC-2,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF' component restart >>>>> probation >>>>>>> timer >>>>>>>> started (timeout: 60000000000 ns) >>>>>>>> Feb 23 09:32:50 SC-2 local0.notice osafamfnd[496]: NO Restarting a >>>>>>> component >>>>>>>> of 'safSu=SC-2,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF' (comp restart count: 1) >>>>>>>> Feb 23 09:32:50 SC-2 local0.notice osafamfnd[496]: NO >>>>>>>> 'safComp=MQND,safSu=SC-2,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF' faulted >>>>> due >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> 'avaDown' : Recovery is 'componentRestart' >>>>>>>> Feb 23 09:32:50 SC-2 local0.info osafmsgnd[736]: mkfifo already >>>> exists: >>>>>>>> /var/lib/opensaf/osafmsgnd.fifo File exists >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And sometimes, on active SC-1 (OpenSAF 5.1), the node is not >>>>>>>> able to >>>> up >>>>>>>> because of following error: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Feb 23 11:00:32 SC-1 local0.err osafclmna[406]: MDTM:TIPC Dsock >>>>> Socket >>>>>>>> creation failed in MDTM_INIT err :Address family not supported by >>>>>>> protocol >>>>>>>> Feb 23 11:00:32 SC-1 local0.err osafclmna[406]: ER >>> ncs_agents_startup >>>>>>> FAILED >>>>>>> [AVM] No such issues ( with both TCP & TIPC) (staging changeset: >>>> 8609 >>>>>> ) >>>>>>>> Are you getting similar problem at your side? >>>>>>>> Please note that, the problem is existed WITH or WITHOUT the #2258 >>>>>>> patch. >>>>>>> [AVM] No , problem only if we apply `2258_v5.patch` V5 patch on >>> staging >>>>>>> (changeset: 8609 ) >>>>>>> try to bring up that node in to cluster. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -AVM >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have informed this to IMM to have a look, not sure any problem >> with >>>>>> MDS >>>>>>>> layer or any problem with my environment setup. >>>>>>>> In the meantime, please have a look at the updated patch, I will >>>>>> continue >>>>>>>> checking the problem. Will keep you updated. >>>>>>> [AVM] I haven't seen any IMM problems >>>>>>>> Regards, Vu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] >>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 5:36 PM >>>>>>>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; >>>>>>>>> lennart.l...@ericsson.com; canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au >>>>>>>>> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: add >>>>>>>> alternative >>>>>>>>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please see correction New Standby SC-1 ( with patch ) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -AVM >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2017 4:02 PM, A V Mahesh wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Hi Vu, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> With this new patch , we have another issue : >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 1) standby Core by `/usr/lib64/opensaf/osaflogd' issue got >>>> resolved >>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>> 2) In-service upgrade is Not working , I have Old Active SC-2 ( >>>> with >>>>>>>>>> out patch ) and New Standby SC-1 ( with patch ) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> the new New Standby SC-1 not joining the cluster ( >> in-service >>>>>>>>>> upgrade failed ) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> New Standby SC-1 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>> ====================================================== >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafamfnd[15752]: NO >>>>>>>>>> 'safSu=SC-1,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF' Presence State >>>>>>>>> INSTANTIATING >>>>>>>>>> => INSTANTIATED >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafamfnd[15752]: NO Assigning >>>>>>>>>> 'safSi=NoRed4,safApp=OpenSAF' ACTIVE to >>>>>>>>>> 'safSu=SC-1,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF' >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafamfnd[15752]: NO Assigned >>>>>>>>>> 'safSi=NoRed4,safApp=OpenSAF' ACTIVE to >>>>>>>>>> 'safSu=SC-1,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF' >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafsmfd[15889]: Started >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafamfnd[15752]: NO >>>>>>>>>> 'safSu=SC-1,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' Presence State >>>>> INSTANTIATING >>>>>>> => >>>>>>>>>> INSTANTIATED >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafamfnd[15752]: NO Assigning >>>>>>>>>> 'safSi=SC-2N,safApp=OpenSAF' STANDBY to >>>>>>>>>> 'safSu=SC-1,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafrded[15672]: NO RDE role set to >>> STANDBY >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafrded[15672]: NO Peer up on node >>> 0x2020f >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafrded[15672]: NO Got peer info request >>> from >>>>>>>>>> node 0x2020f with role ACTIVE >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafrded[15672]: NO Got peer info response >>>>> from >>>>>>>>>> node 0x2020f with role ACTIVE >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafimmd[15691]: NO MDS event from svc_id >>> 24 >>>>>>>>>> (change:5, dest:13) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafimmd[15691]: NO MDS event from svc_id >>> 24 >>>>>>>>>> (change:3, dest:13) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafimmd[15691]: NO MDS event from svc_id >>> 24 >>>>>>>>>> (change:5, dest:13) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafimmd[15691]: NO MDS event from svc_id >>> 25 >>>>>>>>>> (change:3, dest:567412424453430) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafimmd[15691]: NO MDS event from svc_id >>> 25 >>>>>>>>>> (change:3, dest:565213401202663) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafimmd[15691]: NO MDS event from svc_id >>> 25 >>>>>>>>>> (change:3, dest:566312912825221) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafimmd[15691]: NO MDS event from svc_id >>> 25 >>>>>>>>>> (change:3, dest:564113889574230) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafimmnd[15702]: NO Implementer (applier) >>>>>>>>>> connected: 17 (@safAmfService2010f) <127, 2010f> >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osaflogd[15712]: NO >>>>> LOGSV_DATA_GROUPNAME >>>>>>>>> not found >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osaflogd[15712]: NO LOG root directory is: >>>>>>>>>> "/var/log/opensaf/saflog" >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osaflogd[15712]: NO LOG data group is: "" >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osaflogd[15712]: NO LGS_MBCSV_VERSION = >>> 7 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafamfnd[15752]: NO Assigned >>>>>>>>>> 'safSi=SC-2N,safApp=OpenSAF' STANDBY to >>>>>>>>>> 'safSu=SC-1,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 opensafd: OpenSAF(5.1.M0 - ) services >>>>>>>>>> successfully started >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafamfnd[15752]: NO >>>>>>>>>> 'safComp=LOG,safSu=SC-1,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' faulted due >>> to >>>>>>>>>> 'avaDown' : Recovery is 'nodeFailfast' >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafamfnd[15752]: ER >>>>>>>>>> safComp=LOG,safSu=SC-1,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF Faulted due >>>>>>>>> to:avaDown >>>>>>>>>> Recovery is:nodeFailfast >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 osafamfnd[15752]: Rebooting OpenSAF >>> NodeId >>>>> = >>>>>>>>>> 131343 EE Name = , Reason: Component faulted: recovery is node >>>>>>>>>> failfast, OwnNodeId = 131343, SupervisionTime = 60 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:05 SC-1 opensaf_reboot: Rebooting local node; >>>>>>> timeout=60 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:43 SC-1 syslog-ng[1171]: syslog-ng starting up; >>>>>>>>>> version='2.0.9' >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>> ====================================================== >>>>>>>>>> Old - Active - SC-2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>> ====================================================== >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:02 SC-2 osafimmnd[16359]: NO NODE STATE-> >>>>>>>>>> IMM_NODE_R_AVAILABLE >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:02 SC-2 osafimmloadd: NO Sync starting >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:02 SC-2 osafimmloadd: IN Synced 390 objects in >>>>>>>>>> total >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:02 SC-2 osafimmnd[16359]: NO NODE STATE-> >>>>>>>>>> IMM_NODE_FULLY_AVAILABLE 18511 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:02 SC-2 osafimmnd[16359]: NO Epoch set to 3 in >>>>>>> ImmModel >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:02 SC-2 osafimmd[16346]: NO ACT: New Epoch for >>>>>>> IMMND >>>>>>>>>> process at node 2020f old epoch: 2 new epoch:3 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:02 SC-2 osafimmd[16346]: NO ACT: New Epoch for >>>>>>> IMMND >>>>>>>>>> process at node 2040f old epoch: 2 new epoch:3 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:02 SC-2 osafimmd[16346]: NO ACT: New Epoch for >>>>>>> IMMND >>>>>>>>>> process at node 2030f old epoch: 2 new epoch:3 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:02 SC-2 osafimmloadd: NO Sync ending normally >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:02 SC-2 osafimmd[16346]: NO ACT: New Epoch for >>>>>>> IMMND >>>>>>>>>> process at node 2010f old epoch: 0 new epoch:3 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:02 SC-2 osafimmnd[16359]: NO SERVER STATE: >>>>>>>>>> IMM_SERVER_SYNC_SERVER --> IMM_SERVER_READY >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:03 SC-2 osafamfd[16408]: NO Received node_up from >>>>>>> 2010f: >>>>>>>>>> msg_id 1 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:03 SC-2 osafamfd[16408]: NO Node 'SC-1' joined the >>>>>>> cluster >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:03 SC-2 osafimmnd[16359]: NO Implementer >>> connected: >>>>>>> 16 >>>>>>>>>> (MsgQueueService131343) <0, 2010f> >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:03 SC-2 osafrded[16327]: NO Peer up on node >>> 0x2010f >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:03 SC-2 osafrded[16327]: NO Got peer info request >>> from >>>>>>>>>> node 0x2010f with role STANDBY >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:03 SC-2 osafrded[16327]: NO Got peer info response >>>>> from >>>>>>>>>> node 0x2010f with role STANDBY >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:03 SC-2 osafimmd[16346]: NO MDS event from svc_id >>> 24 >>>>>>>>>> (change:5, dest:13) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:03 SC-2 osafimmnd[16359]: NO Implementer (applier) >>>>>>>>>> connected: 17 (@safAmfService2010f) <0, 2010f> >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:03 SC-2 osafamfd[16408]: NO Cluster startup is done >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:04 SC-2 osafimmnd[16359]: NO Implementer (applier) >>>>>>>>>> connected: 18 (@OpenSafImmReplicatorB) <0, 2010f> >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafdtmd[16304]: NO Lost contact with >>>>>>>>>> 'SC-1' >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osaffmd[16336]: NO Node Down event for >>> node >>>>> id >>>>>>>>>> 2010f: >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafimmd[16346]: NO MDS event from svc_id >>> 24 >>>>>>>>>> (change:6, dest:13) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafimmd[16346]: NO MDS event from svc_id >>> 25 >>>>>>>>>> (change:4, dest:564113889574230) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osaffmd[16336]: NO Current role: ACTIVE >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osaffmd[16336]: Rebooting OpenSAF NodeId >>> = >>>>>>>>> 131343 >>>>>>>>>> EE Name = , Reason: Received Node Down for peer controller, >>>>>>> OwnNodeId >>>>>>>>>> = 131599, SupervisionTime = 60 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafrded[16327]: NO Peer down on node >>>>> 0x2010f >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafamfd[16408]: NO Node 'SC-1' left the >>>>> cluster >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osaflogd[16372]: NO Failed (2) to send of >>> WRITE >>>>>>>>>> ack to: 2010f00003d6a >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osaflogd[16372]: NO Failed (2) to send of >>> WRITE >>>>>>>>>> ack to: 2010f00003d6a >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osaflogd[16372]: NO Failed (2) to send of >>> WRITE >>>>>>>>>> ack to: 2010f00003d74 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafclmd[16398]: NO Node 131343 went >>> down. >>>>>>> Not >>>>>>>>>> sending track callback for agents on that node >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafclmd[16398]: NO Node 131343 went >>> down. >>>>>>> Not >>>>>>>>>> sending track callback for agents on that node >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafclmd[16398]: NO Node 131343 went >>> down. >>>>>>> Not >>>>>>>>>> sending track callback for agents on that node >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafclmd[16398]: NO Node 131343 went >>> down. >>>>>>> Not >>>>>>>>>> sending track callback for agents on that node >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafclmd[16398]: NO Node 131343 went >>> down. >>>>>>> Not >>>>>>>>>> sending track callback for agents on that node >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafclmd[16398]: NO Node 131343 went >>> down. >>>>>>> Not >>>>>>>>>> sending track callback for agents on that node >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafclmd[16398]: NO Node 131343 went >>> down. >>>>>>> Not >>>>>>>>>> sending track callback for agents on that node >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafimmd[16346]: WA IMMD lost contact >>> with >>>>>>> peer >>>>>>>>>> IMMD (NCSMDS_RED_DOWN) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafimmnd[16359]: NO Global discard node >>>>>>> received >>>>>>>>>> for nodeId:2010f pid:15702 >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafimmnd[16359]: NO Implementer >>>>> disconnected >>>>>>> 16 >>>>>>>>>> <0, 2010f(down)> (MsgQueueService131343) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafimmnd[16359]: NO Implementer >>>>> disconnected >>>>>>> 17 >>>>>>>>>> <0, 2010f(down)> (@safAmfService2010f) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 osafimmnd[16359]: NO Implementer >>>>> disconnected >>>>>>> 18 >>>>>>>>>> <0, 2010f(down)> (@OpenSafImmReplicatorB) >>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 15:53:09 SC-2 opensaf_reboot: Rebooting remote node in >>> the >>>>>>>>>> absence of PLM is outside the scope of OpenSAF >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>> ====================================================== >>>>>>>>>> -AVM >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2017 3:13 PM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Mahesh, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I put all required patches into one. Try to use this and see if >> you >>>>>>>>>>> still >>>>>>>>>>> have that problem or not. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards, Vu >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 3:35 PM >>>>>>>>>>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; >>>>>>>>>>>> lennart.l...@ericsson.com; canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au >>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: >>>>>>>>>>>> add >>>>>>>>>>> alternative >>>>>>>>>>>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vu, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I used new #3 and #4 patches , Can you please re-send All >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>> final >>>>>>>>>>>> patch in go, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> which i need to apply on today`s staging ( if possible >>>>>>>>>>>> publish >>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>> new version ) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -AVM >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2017 1:52 PM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Mahesh, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Core was generated by `/usr/lib64/opensaf/osaflogd'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #0 ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*) () at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:2195 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2195 src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc: No such file or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> directory. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>> Backtrace still points to old position (lgs_mbcsv:2195). I >> guess >>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>> osaflogd binary has not been updated with the fixed patch. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, Vu >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 3:18 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lennart.l...@ericsson.com; canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: >>> add >>>>>>>>>>>>> alternative >>>>>>>>>>>>>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vu, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> SC-2 standby osaflogd core dumped still occurs ( Not >>>>>>>>>>>>>> resolved) >>> , >>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>>>>>>> patch only resolved the application (/usr/bin/logtest ) >>>>>> Segmentation >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fault on SC-1 Active. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> ============================================================== >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>> # gdb /usr/lib64/opensaf/osaflogd >>>>>>> core_1487751055.osaflogd.4594 >>>>>>>>> GNU >>>>>>>>>>>>>> gdb >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (GDB) SUSE (7.3-0.6.1) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Core was generated by `/usr/lib64/opensaf/osaflogd'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #0 ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*) () at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:2195 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2195 src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc: No such file or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> directory. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (gdb) bt >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #0 ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*) () at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:2195 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #1 0x00007f97b026f960 in ckpt_decode_log_struct(lgs_cb*, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*, void*, void*, unsigned int >>> (*)(edu_hdl_tag*, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> edu_tkn_tag*, void*, unsigned int*, edu_buf_env_tag*, >>>>>>>>> EDP_OP_TYPE, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> EDU_ERR*)) () at src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:950 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #2 0x00007f97b02710dc in >>> ckpt_decode_async_update(lgs_cb*, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*) () at src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:1086 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #3 0x00007f97b0273941 in >>> mbcsv_callback(ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*) >>>>> () >>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:880 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #4 0x00007f97af372596 in ncs_mbscv_rcv_decode () from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #5 0x00007f97af372766 in ncs_mbcsv_rcv_async_update () >>> from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #6 0x00007f97af379370 in mbcsv_process_events () from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #7 0x00007f97af3794db in mbcsv_hdl_dispatch_all () from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #8 0x00007f97af373ce2 in mbcsv_process_dispatch_request () >>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/mbc/mbcsv_api.c:423 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #9 0x00007f97b027096e in lgs_mbcsv_dispatch(unsigned int) >>> () >>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:327 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #10 0x00007f97b024d9f2 in main () at >>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_main.cc:583 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (gdb) bt full >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #0 ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*) () at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:2195 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ckpt_data_handler = {0x7f97b0270300 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_initialize_client(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02701c0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_finalize_client(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0270060 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_agent_down(lgs_cb*, >>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02712f0 <ckpt_proc_log_write(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0271ab0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_open_stream(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b026fe80 >> <ckpt_proc_close_stream(lgs_cb*, >>>>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0272380 <ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0274800 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v2(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0274e10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v3(lgs_cb*, >>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02754f0 <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v5(lgs_cb*, void*)>} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #1 0x00007f97b026f960 in ckpt_decode_log_struct(lgs_cb*, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*, void*, void*, unsigned int >>> (*)(edu_hdl_tag*, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> edu_tkn_tag*, void*, unsigned int*, edu_buf_env_tag*, >>>>>>>>> EDP_OP_TYPE, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> EDU_ERR*)) () at src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:950 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ckpt_data_handler = {0x7f97b0270300 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_initialize_client(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02701c0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_finalize_client(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0270060 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_agent_down(lgs_cb*, >>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02712f0 <ckpt_proc_log_write(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0271ab0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_open_stream(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b026fe80 >> <ckpt_proc_close_stream(lgs_cb*, >>>>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0272380 <ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0274800 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v2(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0274e10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v3(lgs_cb*, >>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02754f0 <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v5(lgs_cb*, void*)>} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #2 0x00007f97b02710dc in >>> ckpt_decode_async_update(lgs_cb*, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*) () at src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:1086 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ckpt_data_handler = {0x7f97b0270300 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_initialize_client(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02701c0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_finalize_client(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0270060 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_agent_down(lgs_cb*, >>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02712f0 <ckpt_proc_log_write(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0271ab0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_open_stream(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b026fe80 >> <ckpt_proc_close_stream(lgs_cb*, >>>>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0272380 <ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0274800 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v2(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0274e10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v3(lgs_cb*, >>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02754f0 <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v5(lgs_cb*, void*)>} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #3 0x00007f97b0273941 in >>> mbcsv_callback(ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*) >>>>> () >>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:880 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ckpt_data_handler = {0x7f97b0270300 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_initialize_client(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02701c0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_finalize_client(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0270060 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_agent_down(lgs_cb*, >>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02712f0 <ckpt_proc_log_write(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0271ab0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_open_stream(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b026fe80 >> <ckpt_proc_close_stream(lgs_cb*, >>>>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0272380 <ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0274800 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v2(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0274e10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v3(lgs_cb*, >>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02754f0 <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v5(lgs_cb*, void*)>} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #4 0x00007f97af372596 in ncs_mbscv_rcv_decode () from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mbcsv_init_process_req_func = {0x7f97af373630 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_initialize_request>, 0x7f97af374f10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_get_sel_obj_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af373be0 >> <mbcsv_process_dispatch_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af373af0 <mbcsv_process_finalize_request>, >>>>>>> 0x7f97af373cf0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_open_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af374050 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_close_request>, >>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af3741e0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_chg_role_request>, 0x7f97af3744c0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_snd_ckpt_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af3747d0 >> <mbcsv_process_snd_ntfy_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af374970 <mbcsv_process_snd_data_req>, >>>>> 0x7f97af373930 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_get_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af374bd0 <mbcsv_process_set_request>} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #5 0x00007f97af372766 in ncs_mbcsv_rcv_async_update () >>> from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mbcsv_init_process_req_func = {0x7f97af373630 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_initialize_request>, 0x7f97af374f10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_get_sel_obj_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af373be0 >> <mbcsv_process_dispatch_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af373af0 <mbcsv_process_finalize_request>, >>>>>>> 0x7f97af373cf0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_open_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af374050 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_close_request>, >>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af3741e0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_chg_role_request>, 0x7f97af3744c0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_snd_ckpt_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af3747d0 >> <mbcsv_process_snd_ntfy_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af374970 <mbcsv_process_snd_data_req>, >>>>> 0x7f97af373930 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_get_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af374bd0 <mbcsv_process_set_request>} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #6 0x00007f97af379370 in mbcsv_process_events () from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> No symbol table info available. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #7 0x00007f97af3794db in mbcsv_hdl_dispatch_all () from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> No symbol table info available. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #8 0x00007f97af373ce2 in mbcsv_process_dispatch_request () >>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/mbc/mbcsv_api.c:423 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mbcsv_init_process_req_func = {0x7f97af373630 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_initialize_request>, 0x7f97af374f10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_get_sel_obj_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af373be0 >> <mbcsv_process_dispatch_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af373af0 <mbcsv_process_finalize_request>, >>>>>>> 0x7f97af373cf0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_open_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af374050 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_close_request>, >>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af3741e0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_chg_role_request>, 0x7f97af3744c0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_snd_ckpt_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af3747d0 >> <mbcsv_process_snd_ntfy_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af374970 <mbcsv_process_snd_data_req>, >>>>> 0x7f97af373930 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mbcsv_process_get_request>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97af374bd0 <mbcsv_process_set_request>} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #9 0x00007f97b027096e in lgs_mbcsv_dispatch(unsigned int) >>> () >>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:327 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ckpt_data_handler = {0x7f97b0270300 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_initialize_client(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02701c0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_finalize_client(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0270060 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_agent_down(lgs_cb*, >>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02712f0 <ckpt_proc_log_write(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0271ab0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_open_stream(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b026fe80 >> <ckpt_proc_close_stream(lgs_cb*, >>>>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0272380 <ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0274800 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v2(lgs_cb*, void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b0274e10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v3(lgs_cb*, >>>>>> void*)>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b02754f0 <ckpt_proc_lgs_cfg_v5(lgs_cb*, void*)>} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---Type <return> to continue, or q <return> to quit--- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> #10 0x00007f97b024d9f2 in main () at >>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_main.cc:583 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> usr1_sel_obj = {raise_obj = -1, rmv_obj = -1} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> _lgs_cb = {mds_hdl = 65547, mds_role = >>>>>>> V_DEST_RL_STANDBY, >>>>>>>>>>>> vaddr >>>>>>>>>>>>>> = 11, log_version = {releaseCode = 65 'A', majorVersion = 2 >>>>>> '\002', >>>>>>>>>>>>>> minorVersion = 2 '\002'}, client_tree = { >>>>>>>>>>>>>> root_node = {bit = -1, left = >> 0x7f97b04cf1b0, >>>>>> right = >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x7f97b04a2418, key_info = 0x7f97b04b7bd0 ""}, params = >>>>>>> {key_size >>>>>>>>>>>>>> = 4}, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> n_nodes = 8}, comp_name = {_opaque = {46, 24947, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 17254, 28015, 15728, 20300, 11335, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 24947, >>>> 21350, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 15733, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 17235, 12845, 29484, 26209, 26451, 12861, 11342, 24947, >>>>> 16742, >>>>>>>>> 28784, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20285, 25968, 21358, 17985, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0 <repeats 105 times>}}, amf_hdl = >>>> 4288675841, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> amfSelectionObject = 15, amf_invocation_id = 0, >>> is_quiesced_set >>>>> = >>>>>>>>>>> false, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> immOiHandle = 554050912783, immSelectionObject = 21, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> clmSelectionObject = 17, clm_hdl = >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4279238657, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ha_state = >>>>>>>>>>>>>> SA_AMF_HA_STANDBY, last_client_id = 208, async_upd_cnt = >>>>> 743, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ckpt_state >>>>>>>>>>>>>> = COLD_SYNC_IDLE, mbcsv_hdl = 4293918753, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mbcsv_sel_obj = 23, mbcsv_ckpt_hdl = >> 4292870177, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mbcsv_peer_version = 7, edu_hdl = {is_inited = true, tree = >>>>>>>>>>>>>> {root_node >>>>>>>>>>> = >>>>>>>>>>>>>> {bit = -1, left = 0x7f97b04cf2e0, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> right = 0x7f97b04a25b8, key_info = >>>>>> 0x7f97b04b7d40 >>>>>>>>>>> ""}, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> params = {key_size = 8}, n_nodes = 12}, to_version = 1}, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully_initialized = true, lga_down_list_head = 0x0, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lga_down_list_tail = 0x0, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> clm_init_sel_obj = >>>>>>>>>>>>>> {raise_obj = >>>>>>>>>>> -1, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rmv_obj = -1}, nid_started = true, scAbsenceAllowed = 900, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lgs_recovery_state = LGS_NORMAL} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> nfds = 7 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fds = {{fd = 19, events = 1, revents = 0}, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> {fd = >>>> 15, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> events = >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1, revents = 0}, {fd = 23, events = 1, revents = 1}, {fd >>>>>>>>>>>>>> = 13, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> events = >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1, revents = 0}, {fd = -1, events = 1, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> revents = 0}, {fd = 17, events = 1, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> revents >> = >>>> 0}, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> {fd = >>>>>>>>>>> 21, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> events = 1, revents = 0}} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mbox_msgs = {0, 0, 0, 0, 0} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lgs_cb = 0x7f97b04a2400 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mbox_low = {0, 0, 0, 0, 0} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lgs_mbox_init_mutex = {__data = {__lock = 0, >>>> __count = >>>>>> 0, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> __owner = 0, __nusers = 0, __kind = 0, __spins = 0, __list = >>>>>>>>>>>>>> {__prev = >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x0, __next = 0x0}}, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> __size = '\000' <repeats 39 times>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> __align = >> 0} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lgs_mbx = 4291821569 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mbox_high = {0, 0, 0, 0, 0} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mbox_full = {false, false, false, false, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> false} >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (gdb) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (gdb) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 13:40:55 SC-2 osafimmnd[4584]: NO Ccb 131 >>>>> COMMITTED >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (immcfg_SC-1_18714) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 13:40:56 SC-2 osafamfnd[4634]: NO >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'safComp=LOG,safSu=SC-2,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' faulted >>>>> due >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'avaDown' : Recovery is 'nodeFailfast' >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 13:40:56 SC-2 osafamfnd[4634]: ER >>>>>>>>>>>>>> safComp=LOG,safSu=SC-2,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF Faulted >>>>> due >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to:avaDown >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Recovery is:nodeFailfast >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 13:40:56 SC-2 osafamfnd[4634]: Rebooting OpenSAF >>>>> NodeId >>>>>>> = >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 131599 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> EE Name = , Reason: Component faulted: recovery is node >>>>> failfast, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> OwnNodeId = 131599, SupervisionTime = 60 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 13:40:56 SC-2 opensaf_reboot: Rebooting local node; >>>>>>>>> timeout=60 >>> ============================================================== >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2017 12:23 PM, A V Mahesh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vu, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2017 12:19 PM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Vu] I has sent you 02 patches. There is code change in >>>>> osaflogd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code >>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix the coredump you have observed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The other one is test code that fix the logtest coredump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok I will re-test , and update you . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -AVM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2017 12:19 PM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Mahehs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> See my reply inline, [Vu]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, Vu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 1:36 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lennart.l...@ericsson.com; >>> canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: add >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alternative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vu, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2017 11:52 AM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Mahesh, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Have a code fault in uml test, and other one in >>> checkpoint. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [AVM] This is Normal Suse 11 VM ( not UML). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have just updated the code. Please re-apply for #3 and >>> #4 >>>>>>>>>>> patches. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [AVM] is these new patch has function changes or only >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test >>>>>>> code >>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Vu] I has sent you 02 patches. There is code change in >>>>> osaflogd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code >>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix the coredump you have observed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The other one is test code that fix the logtest coredump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that, test case #14 of suite 17 should be run on >>> active >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> node, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> getting failed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [AVM] Segmentation fault of /usr/bin/logtest Not a big >>>> issue >>>>>> , >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we need to debug why osaflogd core dumped >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and it >> is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> critical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Vu] I found the problem. You can try with the new one to >>> see >>>>> if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coredump is still there or not. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will put condition check to that test case later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -AVM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, Vu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 12:16 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lennart.l...@ericsson.com; >>>>> canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: add >>>>>>>>>>> alternative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vu, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks , >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While testing /usr/bin/logtest , SC-2 standby osaflogd >>>>> core >>>>>>>>>>>> dumped >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/bin/logtest on SC-1 Active >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> got Segmentation fault , am I missing any other patch ( >> i >>>>> am >>>>>>>>>>> using >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> devel published patch only ) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Following patches i am using : >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) #2293 (sent by Anders Widel, but not yet >>>> pushed) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) #2258 (v2, sent by Lennart, but not yet >>>> pushed >>>>>> yet) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) #2258 (v4, sent by Vu, but not yet pushed >>>> yet) >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ======================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Core was generated by `/usr/lib64/opensaf/osaflogd'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #0 ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*) () at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:2195 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2195 src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc: No such file or >>>>> directory. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (gdb) bt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #0 ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*) () at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:2195 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #1 0x00007f12c3e22960 in >>>>> ckpt_decode_log_struct(lgs_cb*, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*, void*, void*, unsigned int >>>>>>>>> (*)(edu_hdl_tag*, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> edu_tkn_tag*, void*, unsigned int*, edu_buf_env_tag*, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> EDP_OP_TYPE, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EDU_ERR*)) () at src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:950 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #2 0x00007f12c3e240dc in >>>>>>>>> ckpt_decode_async_update(lgs_cb*, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*) () at >>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:1086 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #3 0x00007f12c3e26941 in >>>>>>>>> mbcsv_callback(ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*) () >>>>>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:880 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #4 0x00007f12c2f25596 in ncs_mbscv_rcv_decode () >>> from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #5 0x00007f12c2f25766 in >>> ncs_mbcsv_rcv_async_update >>>>> () >>>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #6 0x00007f12c2f2c370 in mbcsv_process_events () >>> from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #7 0x00007f12c2f2c4db in mbcsv_hdl_dispatch_all () >>> from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #8 0x00007f12c2f26ce2 in >>>>> mbcsv_process_dispatch_request >>>>>>> () >>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/mbc/mbcsv_api.c:423 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #9 0x00007f12c3e2396e in >>> lgs_mbcsv_dispatch(unsigned >>>>> int) >>>>>>> () >>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:327 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #10 0x00007f12c3e009f2 in main () at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_main.cc:583 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (gdb) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ======================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 10:37:06 SC-1 osafimmnd[4020]: NO Invalid error >>>>>>>>> reported >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementer 'safLogService', Ccb 161 will be aborted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 10:37:06 SC-1 osafimmnd[4020]: NO Ccb 161 >>>>> aborted >>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COMPLETED >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> processing (validation) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feb 22 10:37:06 SC-1 osafimmnd[4020]: NO Ccb 161 >>>>>>> ABORTED >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (immcfg_SC- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1_5394) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Add values Fail >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0x000055555556929a in read_and_compare.isra.7 () at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c:1891 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1891 src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c: No such file or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> directory. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (gdb) Feb 22 10:37:07 SC-1 sshd[5298]: Accepted >>> keyboard- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interactive/pam >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for root from 10.176.178.22 port 51945 ssh2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #0 0x000055555556929a in read_and_compare.isra.7 () >>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c:1891 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #1 0x0000555555569bbb in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> check_logRecordDestinationConfigurationEmpty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> () at src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c:2179 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #2 0x0000555555573495 in run_test_case () >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #3 0x0000555555573934 in test_run () >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #4 0x000055555555c7cd in main () at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/apitest/logtest.c:569 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (gdb) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ======================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -AVM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2017 9:48 AM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Mahesh, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I send them in attachment instead, and name them in >>> the >>>>>>>>> order. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just pull the latest code, and apply them without >>>> getting >>>>>>>> any >>>>>>>>>>>>> hunk >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please try with them, and let me know if you see any >>>>>>> problem. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, Vu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 11:09 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen >>> <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lennart.l...@ericsson.com; >>>>>>> canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: >>> add >>>>>>>>>>>>> alternative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vu, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did follow that still i get Hunk #2 FAILED even on >>>>>> today's >>>>>>>>>>>>> staging >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]# >>> patch >>>>> - >>>>>>> p1 >>>>>>>>>>>> <2293 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/base/Makefile.am >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 33 (offset 1 line). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #3 succeeded at 183 (offset 1 line). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/base/file_descriptor.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/base/file_descriptor.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/base/tests/unix_socket_test.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/base/unix_client_socket.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/base/unix_server_socket.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/base/unix_socket.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/base/unix_socket.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]# >>> patch >>>>> - >>>>>>> p1 >>>>>>>>>>>> <2258- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/Makefile.am >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 71 (offset -1 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/config/logsv_classes.xml >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 147. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/config/logsv_classes.xml.rej >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_config.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 35 (offset -5 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #2 FAILED at 705. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #3 FAILED at 971. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_config.cc.rej >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_config.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 304. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_config.h.rej >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_dest.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_dest.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_evt.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_imm.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 45. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #2 succeeded at 235 (offset -1 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #3 FAILED at 877. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #4 succeeded at 1273 (offset -20 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #5 succeeded at 1404 (offset -1 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #6 succeeded at 1449 (offset -20 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #7 succeeded at 2032 (offset -1 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #8 FAILED at 2181. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #9 succeeded at 2271 (offset -54 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #10 succeeded at 2387 (offset -1 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #11 succeeded at 2377 (offset -54 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #12 succeeded at 2478 (offset -1 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #13 succeeded at 2684 (offset -54 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #14 succeeded at 2821 (offset -1 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 out of 14 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_imm.cc.rej >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_main.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v5.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #3 succeeded at 133 (offset -1 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_stream.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_stream.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_util.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_util.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]# >>> patch >>>>> - >>>>>>> p1 >>>>>>>>>>>> <2258- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/Makefile.am >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 180 (offset -3 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 1923. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #2 FAILED at 1979. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #3 FAILED at 2067. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #4 FAILED at 2094. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c.rej >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/apitest/tet_cfg_destination.c >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]# >>> patch >>>>> - >>>>>>> p1 >>>>>>>>>>>> <2258- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/Makefile >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/Makefile.am >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 80 (offset -1 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #2 succeeded at 217 (offset -2 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/tests/Makefile >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/tests/lgs_dest_test.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]# vi >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c.rej >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]# >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ======================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -AVM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/21/2017 3:53 PM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Mahesh, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I has mentioned in below: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To run the test, this patch has >> dependent >>>> on >>>>>>>>>>> following >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patches: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) #2293 (sent by Anders Widel, but not >> yet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pushed) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) #2258 (v2, sent by Lennart, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not >> yet >>>>>> pushed >>>>>>>>>>> yet) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, you need to apply #2293 first, then #2258 which >>>>> sent >>>>>>> by >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lennart >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yesterday, then mine. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, Vu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: A V Mahesh >>> [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:10 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen >>>>> <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lennart.l...@ericsson.com; >>>>>>>>> canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: >>>>> add >>>>>>>>>>>>>> alternative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vu, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this applies on top of log #2146 - V4 , I see >>>>>> both >>>>>>>>>>>>> #tickets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version changes ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in which order i need to apply ( #2146 & #2258 ) >>> or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (#2258 >>>>>>>>>>> & >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #2146). >>> ========================================================= >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/Makefile.am >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 72. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #2 FAILED at 120. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/Makefile.am.rej >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/config/logsv_classes.xml >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 147. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/config/logsv_classes.xml.rej >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_config.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 35 (offset -5 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #2 FAILED at 705. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #3 FAILED at 971. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_config.cc.rej >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_config.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 304. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_config.h.rej >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_dest.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_dest.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_evt.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 1. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #2 succeeded at 30 with fuzz 2 (offset 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #3 succeeded at 1282 (offset 45 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunk #4 succeeded at 1300 (offset 2 lines). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_evt.cc.rej >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> ============================================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> === >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -AVM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/21/2017 3:03 PM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Summary: log: add alternative destinations of log >>>>>>> records >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [#2258] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #2258 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Peer Reviewer(s): Lennart, Canh, Mahesh >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH >>>>>>> ACCESS >>>>>>>>>>>> HERE>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 n >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OpenSAF services y >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Core libraries n >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Samples n >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tests y >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Other n >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To run the test, this patch has >> dependent >>>> on >>>>>>>>>>> following >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patches: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) #2293 (sent by Anders Widel, but not >> yet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pushed) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) #2258 (v2, sent by Lennart, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not >> yet >>>>>> pushed >>>>>>>>>>> yet) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changeset >>>>>>>>> d74aaf3025c99cade3165a15831124548f4d85bd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Author: Vu Minh Nguyen >>>>>>>>> <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 14:36:00 +0700 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> log: add alternative destinations of log >> records >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [#2258] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here are major info, detailed info will be >>> added >>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PR doc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon. 1) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Add >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attribute "saLogRecordDestination" to log >>>>> stream. >>>>>> 2) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Add >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Local >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> socket >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> destintion handler 3) Integrate into first >>>>>> increment >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> made by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lennart >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changeset >>>>>>>>> 4bae27a478c235df3058f43c92d3a5483233b01d >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Author: Vu Minh Nguyen >>>>>>>>> <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 15:07:09 +0700 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> log: add UML test case to verify >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alternative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> destination >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [#2258] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Major changes: 1) Modify Lennart's test cases >>>>>>> because >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enhancing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> destination >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> configuration validation rules. 2) Add test >>>> suite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #17 to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> verify >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alternative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> destination >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changeset >>>>>>> bc375725fed22bb4f8cb3ae3df5f96fb9d281efb >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Author: Vu Minh Nguyen >>>>>>>>> <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 17:22:13 +0700 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> log: add unit tests to verify interfaces >>>> provided >>>>>> by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> destination >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handler >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [#2258] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unit tests to verify major interfaces: 1) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CfgDestination() >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WriteToDestination() >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Added Files: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/apitest/tet_cfg_destination.c >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_dest.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_dest.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.h >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/tests/lgs_dest_test.cc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/tests/Makefile >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Complete diffstat: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/Makefile | 4 + >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/Makefile.am | 31 +++++- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c | 8 +- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/apitest/tet_cfg_destination.c | 483 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/config/logsv_classes.xml | 7 +- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_config.cc | 169 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_config.h | 3 +- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_dest.cc | 707 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_dest.h | 576 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_evt.cc | 33 ++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_imm.cc | 202 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_main.cc | 8 + >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc | 103 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.h | 6 +- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v5.cc | 10 + >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.cc | 177 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.h | 67 >>>>>>>>>>>>> +++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_stream.cc | 60 >>>>>>>>>>>>> +++++++++++- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_stream.h | 16 +++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_util.cc | 63 >>>>>>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_util.h | 11 +- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/tests/Makefile | 20 +++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/log/tests/lgs_dest_test.cc | 209 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 23 files changed, 2896 insertions(+), 77 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deletions(-) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Testing Commands: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Run UML test suite #17 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Testing, Expected Results: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All test passed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 n n >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
