Thread: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for smf: update campaign state before restoring pbe in the co

SourceForge Headquarters 225 Broadway Suite 1600 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 422-6466

Summary: smf: update campaign state before restoring pbe in the completed state
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #944
Peer Reviewer(s): ing...@er...
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): 4.4.x, default
Development branch: <<IF ANY GIVE THE REPO URL>>

--------------------------------
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 d2846c8fed95dcec256faf787bb9a257652cb585
Author:	Mathivanan N.P.<mat...@or...>
Date:	Mon, 23 Jun 2014 21:12:27 -0400

	smf: update campaign state before restoring pbe in the completed state
	[#944] By way of ticket #677 we restore the pbe in the campaign completed
	state itself. i.e. In SmfCampStateExecuting::executeWrapup() {

	a) we first restore the pbe i.e. i_camp->restorePbe();

	b) And, then subsequently update the campaign state, i.e.
	changeState(i_camp, SmfCampStateExecCompleted::instance());

	} However, it is possible that when the pbe is restored, the pbe could take
	more time (than the immutil wait time) to become functionally ready. And in
	such sitautions, the updation to the campaign state will not succeed until
	the PBE is really ready. The patch updates the campaign state first (to imm)
	inthe completed state and subsequently restores the pbe.

Complete diffstat:
------------------
 osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfCampState.cc |  7 ++++---
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Testing Commands:
-----------------
The patch requires simulation of a scenario were pberestore takes a lot of time.
Trigger an upgrade.
Upgrades should work fine.

Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
Same as above.

Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from Ingvar.

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.

Thread: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for smf: update campaign state before restoring pbe in the co

opensaf-devel