Summary: rde: Fix problem of all active SCs rejoin from network split [#3263] V2
Review request for Ticket(s): 3263
Peer Reviewer(s): Surbhi, Thang, Hieu
Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE ***
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-3263
Base revision: f938c0c375bbd77c4343d4bf3bed57abd45b58aa
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 n
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 61a6bc81c530aee4fdd4dcf0425fb6f55e39d505
Author: Minh Chau <minh.c...@dektech.com.au>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 17:40:28 +1000
rde: Use broadcast for peer info message [#3263]
RDE sends peer info message to whom it detects in peer up message.
In roaming SC, when all SCs rejoin from network split, all RDE now
are active. The duplicated active detection relies on peer info
message, which could be seen as one-on-one detection. The mechanism
may cause the last SC not detected if all other SCs are detected as
duplicated active and reboot.
The patch changes to use broadcast peer info message to increase
the possibility of receiving peer info message from all other SCs
revision e1aeef67ca87d091c0da9994cbf074015801139b
Author: Minh Chau <minh.c...@dektech.com.au>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 17:40:09 +1000
rde: Add timeout waiting for peer info [#3263]
RDE detects the peer_up message and suppose the peer_info message
will come afterwards. However, in roaming SC, when all SCs rejoins
from network split, the last active SC may be missing out the peer
info message since the others SC have already reboot.
Patch adds timeout to wait for peer info message to avoid a risk
of missing peer info message to detect duplicated active SC. The
new timeout is used for all peers, meaning that the timeout reset
for each peer up message and wait for the last peer info message.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
src/rde/rded/rde_cb.h | 2 +-
src/rde/rded/rde_main.cc | 22 ++++++++++++----------
src/rde/rded/rde_mds.cc | 20 +++++++++++---------
src/rde/rded/role.cc | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
src/rde/rded/role.h | 6 ++++++
5 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 21 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 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
