Hi all,

Any comments/idea from you.

Thanks

Minh


On 03/10/18 09:29, Minh Chau wrote:
> Summary: amf: Add new susi fsm EXCESSIVE state to handle excessive assignment 
> due to splitbrain [#2929]
> Review request for Ticket(s): 2929
> Peer Reviewer(s): Hans, Gary, Nagu
> Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE ***
> Affected branch(es): develop
> Development branch: ticket-2929
> Base revision: 7f7f53a52e3ab700ffcd68b3ab8f0e36dd33d336
> Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/minh-chau/review
>
> --------------------------------
> 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 ***
>
> revision 792d19d1abeb568d5d1ef1ecf9c1937e547974ce
> Author:       Minh Chau <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2018 09:12:55 +1000
>
> amfd: Remove sending node reboot in 2N SG for duplicated assignment [#2929]
>
> The first part of #2929 which has introduced EXCESSIVE susi fms state,
> it also handles the duplicated 2N assignments so that the node that has
> duplicated assignments will be reboot.
> This patch removes the sending node reboot in avd_sg_2n_act_susi(), or
> amfd will send multiple node reboot to the same node otherwise. This
> patch also checks the duplicated QUIESCED assignments.
>
>
>
> revision 7c6de91c653c592ad0c0d1417567a79a656d81fa
> Author:       Minh Chau <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2018 08:49:29 +1000
>
> amf: Add new susi fsm EXCESSIVE state to handle excessive assignment due to 
> splitbrain [#2929]
>
> Once splitbrain happens, we have multiple partitions, in which AMF will 
> continue
> assignments to the spare SUs in each partitions. When network merge, these 
> partitions
> join into one cluster and the assignments of SU become excessive.
>
> This patch adds a new susi fsm EXCESSIVE state, which is marked for the 
> excessive
> assignments that AMF detects after multiple partitions join.
> For 2N SG: Any excessive assignment exists, the SU that has 2N assignment has 
> its hosting node reboot
> For NWay Active, NoRed: Remove the excessive assignment only.
> For NpM, Nway: not supported
>
>
>
> Complete diffstat:
> ------------------
>  src/amf/amfd/cluster.cc        |  5 +++++
>  src/amf/amfd/sg.cc             | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  src/amf/amfd/sg.h              |  9 ++++++++-
>  src/amf/amfd/sg_2n_fsm.cc      | 46 
> ++++++++++++++++--------------------------
>  src/amf/amfd/sg_nored_fsm.cc   | 18 +++++++++++++++++
>  src/amf/amfd/sg_nwayact_fsm.cc | 18 +++++++++++++++++
>  src/amf/amfd/sgproc.cc         |  8 ++++++--
>  src/amf/amfd/si.cc             | 11 ++++++++++
>  src/amf/amfd/si.h              |  1 +
>  src/amf/amfd/siass.cc          | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  src/amf/amfd/susi.h            |  5 ++++-
>  11 files changed, 160 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
>
> Testing Commands:
> -----------------
> Repeat the tests described in #2926, #2920, #2929
>
>
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --------------------------
> For 2N: Node has involved any excessive 2N assignments will be reboot
> For NwayActive, NoRed: Excessive assignment is removed only
>
>
> Conditions of Submission:
> -------------------------
> ack from reviewers or in a week time
>
>
> 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 ~/.gitconfig file (i.e. user.name, user.email 
> etc)
>
> ___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the
>     the threaded patch review.
>
> ___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results
>     for in-service upgradability test.
>
> ___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series
>     do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual.
>
>



_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to