Summary: imm: return try-again on write requests while fs is unavailable [#3019] Review request for Ticket(s): 3019 Peer Reviewer(s): Hans, Lennart, Gary Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-3019 Base revision: 7f68859e0dc70179eff72515f28bc69ffd1ab208 Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/winhvu/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 NOTE: Patch(es) contain lines longer than 80 characers Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): --------------------------------------------- *** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE *** revision 3b1c3551f74290e1eda711f7136a40d2168ab375 Author: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au> Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 13:13:46 +0700 imm: return try-again on write requests while fs is unavailable [#3019] When underlying file system is unresponsive to pbe write request, all IMM requests that required to be persistent such as creating an IMM object or creating an IMM class likely gets SA_AIS_ERR_TIMEOUT. This changeset introduces two administrative operations which are provided to let user inform IMM if the file system is unavailable or not. If the file system is not available, IMM will return SA_AIS_ERR_TRY_AGAIN earlier to the caller instead of SA_AIS_ERR_TIMEOUT. Besides, a new IMM attribute, saImmFileSystemStatus, is added to SaImmMngt class; the value shows the current status of the file system according to IMM view. Complete diffstat: ------------------ src/imm/README | 49 +++++++- .../apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c | 136 +++++++++++++++++++++ src/imm/common/immsv_api.h | 5 +- src/imm/config/immsv_classes.xml | 7 ++ src/imm/immnd/ImmModel.cc | 91 ++++++++++++-- src/imm/immnd/ImmModel.h | 1 + src/imm/immnd/immnd_evt.c | 11 +- src/imm/immnd/immnd_init.h | 1 + 8 files changed, 288 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- 02 new test cases are added: immomtest 2 58 immomtest 2 59 Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- All tests are passed Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- Ack from peer reviewers 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 ~/.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