[devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for AMF #822

[Hans F. <han...@er...>]

Summary: amfnd: send SUSI response after cleanup of comp
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #822
Peer Reviewer(s): Praveen, Nags, Hans N
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): all
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):
---------------------------------------------

changeset 133661722542fbd47ef6c277341e7ed830ee9733
Author:	Hans Feldt <han...@er...>
Date:	Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:03:39 +0200

	amfnd: send SUSI response after cleanup of comp [#822]

	During component fail-over a standby component can be activated before
	cleanup of the faulty component has finished effectively introducing split
	brain on component level.

	This happens because cleanup is not awaited before the SUSI response message
	is sent to the director.

	Fix this by sending the response after the cleanup has finished.


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/clc.cc |  26 +++++++++++++++++++-------
 osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/err.cc |  30 ------------------------------
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-----------------
 Initiate comp-failover in 2N


Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
 Works, cleanup should come before standby activation


Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
 Ack from reviewers


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.