Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for plm: use SAHPI_HS_ACTION_XXX for activating/deactivating HE if Full-5 HS model [#943]
Ack, Mathi. -Original Message- From: Alex Jones [mailto:ajo...@genband.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 2:49 AM To: Mathivanan Naickan Palanivelu Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for plm: use SAHPI_HS_ACTION_XXX for activating/deactivating HE if Full-5 HS model [#943] Summary: use SAHPI_HS_ACTION_XXX for activating/deactivating HE if Full-5 HS model Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 943 Peer Reviewer(s): Mathi Pull request to: Mathi Affected branch(es): default Development branch: Impacted area Impact y/n Docsn Build systemn RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF servicesy OpenSAF servicesn Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each y above): - changeset 49a80c50cd5c7e8579106e3c328cc42f6fb14b56 Author:Alex Jones ajo...@genband.com Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 17:15:35 -0400 plm: use SAHPI_HS_ACTION_XXX for activating/deactivating HE if Full- 5 HS model [#943] Jul 14 16:56:02 linux-po6q osafplmd[32627]: ER plms_hrb_req FAILED. Ent: safHE=Fan_Tray_1,safDomain=Q50chassis, cmd: 6#011#011#011resp: 2 Jul 14 16:56:02 linux-po6q osafplmd[32627]: ER Ent safHE=Fan_Tray_1,safDomain=Q50chassis deactivation failed. PLMs is using SAHPI_POWER_ON/OFF for Full/Partial-5 Hotswap entities, which is not correct. This is not consistent with hsm_get_hotswap_model() in plms_hsm.c which sets Full/Partial-5 based on whether or not SAHPI_CAPABILITY_MANAGED_HOTSWAP is set. If SAHPI_CAPABILITY_POWER is set, then the model is 3-HS. According to the documentation for saHpiResourcePowerStateSet SA_ERR_HPI_CAPABILITY is returned if the resource does not support power management, as indicated by SAHPI_CAPABILITY_POWER in the resource's RPT entry. A Full/Partial-5 will never have SAHPI_CAPABILITY_POWER set. SAHPI_HS_ACTION_INSERTION/EXTRACTION should be used instead for Full/Partial-5 entities. Also, some changes were made to facilitate debugging. The code is printing out SaErrorT as an unsigned int, but it is a signed int, so the return codes from these HPI API calls are not properly printing out. Complete diffstat: -- osaf/services/saf/plmsv/plms/hpi_intf/plms_hrb.c | 35 -- - osaf/services/saf/plmsv/plms/plms_he_pres_fsm.c | 8 ++-- 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) Testing Commands: - 1) Issue a PLM admin deactivate on an HE that is a Full-Partial/5 entity Testing, Expected Results: -- 1) It should deactivate, and there should be no errors from HPI. Conditions of Submission: - Arch Built StartedLinux distro --- mipsn 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
[devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for plm: use SAHPI_HS_ACTION_XXX for activating/deactivating HE if Full-5 HS model [#943]
Summary: use SAHPI_HS_ACTION_XXX for activating/deactivating HE if Full-5 HS model Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 943 Peer Reviewer(s): Mathi Pull request to: Mathi Affected branch(es): default Development branch: Impacted area Impact y/n Docsn Build systemn RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF servicesy OpenSAF servicesn Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each y above): - changeset 49a80c50cd5c7e8579106e3c328cc42f6fb14b56 Author: Alex Jones ajo...@genband.com Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 17:15:35 -0400 plm: use SAHPI_HS_ACTION_XXX for activating/deactivating HE if Full-5 HS model [#943] Jul 14 16:56:02 linux-po6q osafplmd[32627]: ER plms_hrb_req FAILED. Ent: safHE=Fan_Tray_1,safDomain=Q50chassis, cmd: 6#011#011#011resp: 2 Jul 14 16:56:02 linux-po6q osafplmd[32627]: ER Ent safHE=Fan_Tray_1,safDomain=Q50chassis deactivation failed. PLMs is using SAHPI_POWER_ON/OFF for Full/Partial-5 Hotswap entities, which is not correct. This is not consistent with hsm_get_hotswap_model() in plms_hsm.c which sets Full/Partial-5 based on whether or not SAHPI_CAPABILITY_MANAGED_HOTSWAP is set. If SAHPI_CAPABILITY_POWER is set, then the model is 3-HS. According to the documentation for saHpiResourcePowerStateSet SA_ERR_HPI_CAPABILITY is returned if the resource does not support power management, as indicated by SAHPI_CAPABILITY_POWER in the resource's RPT entry. A Full/Partial-5 will never have SAHPI_CAPABILITY_POWER set. SAHPI_HS_ACTION_INSERTION/EXTRACTION should be used instead for Full/Partial-5 entities. Also, some changes were made to facilitate debugging. The code is printing out SaErrorT as an unsigned int, but it is a signed int, so the return codes from these HPI API calls are not properly printing out. Complete diffstat: -- osaf/services/saf/plmsv/plms/hpi_intf/plms_hrb.c | 35 --- osaf/services/saf/plmsv/plms/plms_he_pres_fsm.c | 8 ++-- 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) Testing Commands: - 1) Issue a PLM admin deactivate on an HE that is a Full-Partial/5 entity Testing, Expected Results: -- 1) It should deactivate, and there should be no errors from HPI. Conditions of Submission: - Arch Built StartedLinux distro --- mipsn 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 ~/.hgrc file (i.e.
