Summary: SMF: upgrade does not affect initial AU/DU state
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 812
Peer Reviewer(s): Robert, Bertil
Pull request to:
Affected branch(es): default
Development branch: default
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services n
OpenSAF services y
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
SMF default behavior: Whithin a procedure the deactivation units (DU) will
always be unlocked at
activation (AU) i.e. previusly locked Nodes and SUs will be unlocked.
With this patch the default behavior is possible to change: Within a procedure
the admin states
of the DU will remain after unlocking phase of the activation units (AU).
E.g. a "locked" SU will remain in state "locked" after the procedure has
completed.
Configuration: if SMF config attribute smfKeepDuState is set to >0 (true) the
default behavior
is changed. In all other cases (attribute not found, not set or set to "0") the
default behavior
will be kept.
changeset de339076bfedd345c14856d77f83277b2dba5f84
Author: Ingvar Bergstrom <ingvar.bergst...@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:38:09 +0100
SMF: upgrade does not affect initial AU/DU state [#812]
If SMF config attr smfKeepDuState is set to >0 (true), the upgrade
procedures will complete leaving the AU/DU in the same admin state as
before
the procedure was started.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/smfsv/config/smfsv_classes.xml | 7 ++++
osaf/services/saf/smfsv/config/smfsv_objects.xml | 4 ++
osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfCampaign.hh | 1 +
osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfStepTypes.cc | 16 +++++++++++
osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUpgradeProcedure.cc | 129
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------------
osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUpgradeStep.cc | 129
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------------
osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUpgradeStep.hh | 33
+++++++++++++++++++----
osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/smfd_campaign_oi.cc | 15 ++++++++++
osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/smfd_cb.h | 1 +
9 files changed, 239 insertions(+), 96 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
Run a campaign which updates nodes and/or SUs.
If config attr is set: The admin states shall not be affected by the campaign.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
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 ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards
with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more
Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=190641631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
