Hi Gary, ack for code review. Still a few other places that call opensaf_quick_reboot can be visited later.
Thanks, Minh > Summary: fmd: improve failover response time V2 [#3008] > Review request for Ticket(s): 3008 > Peer Reviewer(s): Hans, Minh > Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** > Affected branch(es): develop > Development branch: ticket-3008 > Base revision: 5766361568498f8a496d87d8daafe9bffbd75ed9 > Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/userid-2226215/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): > --------------------------------------------- > > revision 8ccffc2cd9cd117578227e9cd49421e5c578fec6 > Author: Gary Lee <gary....@dektech.com.au> > Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 14:57:53 +1100 > > rded: do not send SUCCESS to main thread [#3008] > > do not send RDE_MSG_ACTIVE_PROMOTION_SUCCESS to > main thread if lock cannot be obtained > > > > revision 28e17d107f4a079155e03d9f875a3c0262ea19f5 > Author: Gary Lee <gary....@dektech.com.au> > Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 14:57:53 +1100 > > fmd: improve failover response time [#3008] > > Improve failover response time if split brain prevention is enabled > but FMS_TAKEOVER_PRIORITISE_PARTITION_SIZE is set to 0. > > Also, return immediately if node promotion fails to avoid > sending active role to RDA. > > > > Complete diffstat: > ------------------ > src/fm/fmd/fm_rda.cc | 14 +++++++++----- > src/rde/rded/role.cc | 2 ++ > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > Testing Commands: > ----------------- > *** LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES *** > > > Testing, Expected Results: > -------------------------- > *** PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS *** > > > 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 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 Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
