Menu
▾
▴
[devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for imm: Add upgrade support for saImmOmValidate [#798]
|
From: Anders B. <and...@er...> - 2014-05-21 10:29:17
|
Summary: imm: Add upgrade support for saImmOmValidate [#798]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 798
Peer Reviewer(s): Neel; Zoran
Pull request to:
Affected branch(es): default(4.5)
Development branch:
--------------------------------
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 985b194fb146b2080667e5437c411fa44262a193
Author: Anders Bjornerstedt <and...@er...>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 12:09:02 +0200
imm: Add upgrade support for saImmOmValidate [#798]
Symptoms are during upgrade to OpenSAF 4.5: May 16 12:01:03 SC-2 local0.err
osafimmnd[427]: ER Can not sync Ccb that is active
The cause of the problem (expected actually) was that upgrade support had
not yet been added to default (4.5). Addition of the mechanism for
supporting upgrade of immsv to OpensAF 4.5 is tracked by ticket #842.
Solution is first to get the implementation of [#842] pushed, then to get
this changeset pushed. This changeset uses the mechanism provided in [#842]
to (a) onlu allow saImmOmCcbValidate if protocol45 is allowed: and (b)
revert to the pre 4.5 protocol for syncing ccb-states if protocol45 is not
allowed. Note that saImmOmCcbAbort is not a problem because it does not
depend on any new message types.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmModel.cc | 15 ++++++++++-----
osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd_evt.c | 8 +++++++-
2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Prerequisite is to have the patch for #842 (support for immsv upgrade to OpenSAF 4.5)
applied. Then this patch.
The imm nostdFlags bit controlling wheter the imm allows 4.5 protocols or not
is bit 5 (decimal value 16).
It is turned on automatically at a cluster start/restart.
It is turned on manually by the admin-op:
immadm -o 1 -p opensafImmNostdFlags:SA_UINT32_T:16 \
opensafImm=opensafImm,safApp=safImmService
it is turned off by the admin op:
immadm -o 2 -p opensafImmNostdFlags:SA_UINT32_T:16 \
opensafImm=opensafImm,safApp=safImmService
The value of the attribute opensafImmNostdFlag can be fetched by an:
immlist opensafImm=opensafImm,safApp=safImmService
if PBE is enabled. If PBE is not enabled the attribute will show the value 0
since there is no OI attached.
Possible tests to use are:
immomtest 6 64
immomtest 6 65
immoitest 4 6
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
The above immom/oi tests should fail if bit 5 is not set (i.e. 4.5protocols not allowed).
The tests should succeed if the bit is set (the normal case on a 4.5 cluster).
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from Neel.
Arch Built Started Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips n n
mips64 n n
x86 n n
x86_64 n 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.
|
