Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655

[Vo Minh Hoang]

Dear Mahesh and Zoran,

I checked the problem that mentioned in this ticket in newest source code
and cannot reproduce following recorded steps.

I suggest to set #1655 and #1765 to invalid and open new ones if found any
problem.
Is that possible?

Thank you and best regards,
Hoang

-Original Message-
From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 10:52 AM
To: Zoran Milinkovic ; Hoang Minh Vo

Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree
when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655

Hi Hoang,

Is this issue is an extension of  ticket #1765 issue `cpd: to correct
failover behavior of cpsv [#1765]`  ?
If so let us fist address the Ticket  #1765 with my proposed approach , then
we can fix this issue on top of that.

-AVM

On 1/31/2017 5:23 PM, Zoran Milinkovic wrote:
> Hi Hoang,
>
> Can you share the test code ?
> I cannot reproduce steps you have described. I might be missing something.
>
> Thanks,
> Zoran
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Hoang Vo [mailto:hoang.m...@dektech.com.au]
> Sent: den 19 januari 2017 08:08
> To: mahesh.va...@oracle.com; Zoran Milinkovic 
> 
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update 
> ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655
>
> Summary: cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint 
> [#1655] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1655 Peer Reviewer(s): 
> mahesh.va...@oracle.com; zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com Pull request 
> to: mahesh.va...@oracle.com Affected branch(es): default Development 
> branch: default
>
> 
> 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):
> -
> Rebase patch to latest folder structure, do not change any source code 
> inside Patched after 1765
>
> changeset 6ffeaa4fbf2e352bd42a4bba160c4c593efcf749
> Author:   Hoang Vo 
> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 13:59:09 +0700
>
>   Problem:
>    The replica IMM objects are not created after opening a
checkpoint
>   in following scenario:
>
>   1. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE 2. Unlink
the
>   checkpoint ( the checkpoint is still being used) 3. Open a
checkpoint with
>   flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE with same name as the one in 1.
>
>   After step 3. although the checkpoint is opened successfully, the
replica
>   IMM objects are not created.
>
>   The problem happens because the CPD does not delete relating nodes
from
>   ckpt_reploc_tree when it unlinks the checkpoint in step 2.
>
>   Solution:
>   - The solution is to remove replica location node of that
checkpoint
>   from the ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking the checkpoint.
>
>
> Complete diffstat:
> --
>   src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_db.c   |   4 
>   src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_proc.c |  30 ++
>   2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
>
> Testing Commands:
> -
> Follow testing step specified in the ticket 1655
>
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --
> Refer the ticket 1655 description for expected result
>
> Conditions of Submission:
> -
> ACK from maintainer
>
> 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.
>  

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655

[A V Mahesh]

Hi Hoang,

Is this issue is an extension of  ticket #1765 issue `cpd: to correct 
failover behavior of cpsv [#1765]`  ?
If so let us fist address the Ticket  #1765 with my proposed approach , 
then we can fix this issue on top of that.

-AVM

On 1/31/2017 5:23 PM, Zoran Milinkovic wrote:
> Hi Hoang,
>
> Can you share the test code ?
> I cannot reproduce steps you have described. I might be missing something.
>
> Thanks,
> Zoran
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Hoang Vo [mailto:hoang.m...@dektech.com.au]
> Sent: den 19 januari 2017 08:08
> To: mahesh.va...@oracle.com; Zoran Milinkovic 
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when 
> unlinking a checkpoint [#1655
>
> Summary: cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655]
> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1655
> Peer Reviewer(s): mahesh.va...@oracle.com; zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com
> Pull request to: mahesh.va...@oracle.com
> Affected branch(es): default
> Development branch: default
>
> 
> 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):
> -
> Rebase patch to latest folder structure, do not change any source code inside
> Patched after 1765
>
> changeset 6ffeaa4fbf2e352bd42a4bba160c4c593efcf749
> Author:   Hoang Vo 
> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 13:59:09 +0700
>
>   Problem:
>    The replica IMM objects are not created after opening a 
> checkpoint
>   in following scenario:
>
>   1. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE 2. Unlink the
>   checkpoint ( the checkpoint is still being used) 3. Open a checkpoint 
> with
>   flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE with same name as the one in 1.
>
>   After step 3. although the checkpoint is opened successfully, the 
> replica
>   IMM objects are not created.
>
>   The problem happens because the CPD does not delete relating nodes from
>   ckpt_reploc_tree when it unlinks the checkpoint in step 2.
>
>   Solution:
>   - The solution is to remove replica location node of that 
> checkpoint
>   from the ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking the checkpoint.
>
>
> Complete diffstat:
> --
>   src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_db.c   |   4 
>   src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_proc.c |  30 ++
>   2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
>
> Testing Commands:
> -
> Follow testing step specified in the ticket 1655
>
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --
> Refer the ticket 1655 description for expected result
>
> Conditions of Submission:
> -
> ACK from maintainer
>
> 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 

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655

[Zoran Milinkovic]

Hi Hoang,

Can you share the test code ?
I cannot reproduce steps you have described. I might be missing something.

Thanks,
Zoran

-Original Message-
From: Hoang Vo [mailto:hoang.m...@dektech.com.au] 
Sent: den 19 januari 2017 08:08
To: mahesh.va...@oracle.com; Zoran Milinkovic 
Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when 
unlinking a checkpoint [#1655

Summary: cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1655
Peer Reviewer(s): mahesh.va...@oracle.com; zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com
Pull request to: mahesh.va...@oracle.com
Affected branch(es): default
Development branch: default


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):
-
Rebase patch to latest folder structure, do not change any source code inside
Patched after 1765

changeset 6ffeaa4fbf2e352bd42a4bba160c4c593efcf749
Author: Hoang Vo 
Date:   Thu, 19 Jan 2017 13:59:09 +0700

Problem:
 The replica IMM objects are not created after opening a 
checkpoint
in following scenario:

1. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE 2. Unlink the
checkpoint ( the checkpoint is still being used) 3. Open a checkpoint 
with
flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE with same name as the one in 1.

After step 3. although the checkpoint is opened successfully, the 
replica
IMM objects are not created.

The problem happens because the CPD does not delete relating nodes from
ckpt_reploc_tree when it unlinks the checkpoint in step 2.

Solution:
- The solution is to remove replica location node of that 
checkpoint
from the ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking the checkpoint.


Complete diffstat:
--
 src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_db.c   |   4 
 src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_proc.c |  30 ++
 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-
Follow testing step specified in the ticket 1655

Testing, Expected Results:
--
Refer the ticket 1655 description for expected result

Conditions of Submission:
-
ACK from maintainer

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. 

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655

[A V Mahesh]

Ok i will review/check the patch/case update you.

-AVM

On 1/19/2017 1:17 PM, Vo Minh Hoang wrote:
>
> Dear Mahesh,
>
> >>So we can always re-use the existing UN-linked resources by just 
> simply removing UN-link flag,
> >> what is your opinion?
>
> Based on my understanding, new checkpoint even has the same name but 
> might have different attribute (collocated/non-collocated) and be 
> opened from different node make the way we manage replicas become 
> complicated.
>
> I fear that will cost more work that Nhat’s solution.
>
> Thank you and best regards,
>
> Hoang
>
> *From:*
>

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655

[Vo Minh Hoang]

Dear Mahesh,

 

>> So we can always re-use the existing UN-linked resources by just simply
removing UN-link flag, 
>> what is your opinion?

 

Based on my understanding, new checkpoint even has the same name but might
have different attribute (collocated/non-collocated) and be opened from
different node make the way we manage replicas become complicated.

I fear that will cost more work that Nhat's solution.

 

Thank you and best regards,

Hoang

 

From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 2:29 PM
To: Hoang Vo ; zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com
Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree
when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655

 

HiHoang,

>>The replica IMM objects are not created after opening a checkpoint in
following scenario:

1. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE

2. Unlink the checkpoint ( the checkpoint is still being used)

3. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE with same name
as the on in 1.

>>After 3. although the checkpoint is opened successfully, the replica IMM
objects are not created.

As I Know CKPT specification  doesn't say , if checkpoint is reopened with
same name
 which is currently in UN-linked state and not yet expired/cleaned  an new
instance should be created .

So we can always re-use the existing UN-linked resources by just simply
removing UN-link flag, 
what is your opinion?

-AVM

On 1/19/2017 12:37 PM, Hoang Vo wrote:

Summary: cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1655
Peer Reviewer(s): mahesh.va...@oracle.com  ;
zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com  
Pull request to: mahesh.va...@oracle.com  
Affected branch(es): default
Development branch: default
 

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):
-
Rebase patch to latest folder structure, do not change any source code
inside
Patched after 1765
 
changeset 6ffeaa4fbf2e352bd42a4bba160c4c593efcf749
Author:  Hoang Vo  

Date:Thu, 19 Jan 2017 13:59:09 +0700
 
  Problem:
   The replica IMM objects are not created after opening a
checkpoint
  in following scenario:
 
  1. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE 2. Unlink the
  checkpoint ( the checkpoint is still being used) 3. Open a checkpoint with
  flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE with same name as the one in 1.
 
  After step 3. although the checkpoint is opened successfully, the replica
  IMM objects are not created.
 
  The problem happens because the CPD does not delete relating nodes from
  ckpt_reploc_tree when it unlinks the checkpoint in step 2.
 
  Solution:
  - The solution is to remove replica location node of that
checkpoint
  from the ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking the checkpoint.
 
 
Complete diffstat:
--
 src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_db.c   |   4 
 src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_proc.c |  30 ++
 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
 
 
Testing Commands:
-
Follow testing step specified in the ticket 1655
 
Testing, Expected Results:
--
Refer the ticket 1655 description for expected result
 
Conditions of Submission:
-
ACK from maintainer
 
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 

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655

[A V Mahesh]

HiHoang,

 >>The replica IMM objects are not created after opening a checkpoint in 
following scenario:

 1. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE
 2. Unlink the checkpoint ( the checkpoint is still being used)
 3. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE with same name
as the on in 1.

 >>After 3. although the checkpoint is opened successfully, the replica 
IMM objects are not created.

As I Know CKPT specification  doesn't say , if checkpoint is reopened 
with same name
  which is currently in UN-linked state and not yet expired/cleaned an 
new instance should be created .

So we can always re-use the existing UN-linked resources by just simply 
removing UN-link flag,
what is your opinion?

-AVM
On 1/19/2017 12:37 PM, Hoang Vo wrote:
> Summary: cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655]
> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1655
> Peer Reviewer(s): mahesh.va...@oracle.com; zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com
> Pull request to: mahesh.va...@oracle.com
> Affected branch(es): default
> Development branch: default
>
> 
> 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):
> -
> Rebase patch to latest folder structure, do not change any source code inside
> Patched after 1765
>
> changeset 6ffeaa4fbf2e352bd42a4bba160c4c593efcf749
> Author:   Hoang Vo 
> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 13:59:09 +0700
>
>   Problem:
>    The replica IMM objects are not created after opening a 
> checkpoint
>   in following scenario:
>
>   1. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE 2. Unlink the
>   checkpoint ( the checkpoint is still being used) 3. Open a checkpoint 
> with
>   flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE with same name as the one in 1.
>
>   After step 3. although the checkpoint is opened successfully, the 
> replica
>   IMM objects are not created.
>
>   The problem happens because the CPD does not delete relating nodes from
>   ckpt_reploc_tree when it unlinks the checkpoint in step 2.
>
>   Solution:
>   - The solution is to remove replica location node of that 
> checkpoint
>   from the ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking the checkpoint.
>
>
> Complete diffstat:
> --
>   src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_db.c   |   4 
>   src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_proc.c |  30 ++
>   2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
>
> Testing Commands:
> -
> Follow testing step specified in the ticket 1655
>
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --
> Refer the ticket 1655 description for expected result
>
> Conditions of Submission:
> -
> ACK from maintainer
>
> 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