Summary: v3 amfnd: saAmfSGCompRestartProb timer is not stopped after the
relevant model had been deleted [#831]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 831
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans F, Hans N, Nagendra, Praveen
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 y
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>>
changeset 2335193f09ef673375748ed672204db8b99d3523
Author: Minh Hon Chau <minh.c...@dektech.com.au>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 10:48:49 +1000
v3 amfnd: saAmfSGCompRestartProb timer is not stopped after the relevant
model had been deleted [#831]
Problem: If the timer is started, delete the model, load model again,
and
kill component in order to escalate to the su restart. Then if the
previous
timer event comes during the escalation, it will reset component restart
counter. So there will be no su restart at the end. The similiar problem
also happens in case of saAmfSGSuRestartProb.
Change: Stop both timer saAmfSGCompRestartProb and saAmfSGSuRestartProb
(if
it started) in the sequence of lock-in su
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/susm.cc | 13 +++++++++++++
1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
- Load 2N model, unlock-in/unlock 2 SU
- Configure saAmfSGCompRestartMax=2, saAmfSGCompRestartProb=15000000000
- Kill component 1 time in order that the timer saAmfSGCompRestartProb starts
- Lock/Lock-in 2 SU, unload model
- Load the same 2N model, unlock-in/unlock 2 SU
- Configure saAmfSGCompRestartMax=8, saAmfSGCompRestartProb=15000000000
- Kill component 9 times, SU restarts
(The above steps should be executed in test script)
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
SU restarts at the 9th of killing component.
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 y 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 ~/.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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is your legacy SCM system holding you back? Join Perforce May 7 to find out:
• 3 signs your SCM is hindering your productivity
• Requirements for releasing software faster
• Expert tips and advice for migrating your SCM now
http://p.sf.net/sfu/perforce
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
