Bug 1445531
Summary: | block upgrade of libvirt if corresponding qemu-kvm or qemu-kvm-rhev is not available | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | Reporter: | Jeff Nelson <jen> |
Component: | libvirt | Assignee: | Jiri Denemark <jdenemar> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | chhu |
Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | 7.4 | CC: | areis, berrange, dyuan, jdenemar, jen, jsuchane, lmen, mrezanin, ovasik, rbalakri, xuzhang, yalzhang, zpeng |
Target Milestone: | rc | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2017-12-04 12:34:21 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Jeff Nelson
2017-04-25 21:41:17 UTC
This won't really help much. Even if the required new qemu-kvm(-rhev) is installed, existing domains will still be running with the old version of QEMU. Are we trying to avoid an existing problem with this or is this just a theoretical exercise? AFAIK even partial upgrades from RHEL-x.y to RHEL-x.y+n are not supported and yet very few packages actually try to prevent users from doing it. I think it only makes sense if there is a real issue resulting from a mixed environment. I tend to agree we shouldn't do this. Libvirt is expected to work against both the old & new QEMU, and if it didn't that would itself be considered a bug in libvirt we would aim fix. Jiri writes: >This won't really help much. Even if the required new qemu-kvm(-rhev) is >installed, existing domains will still be running with the old version of QEMU. I gave you a bad example on how to reproduce the problem. Here is a better one. 1. Install RHEL-7.2 including libvirt 2. Install qemu-kvm-rhev from the RHEL-7.2 timeframe (qemu-kvm-rhev-2.3.0-31.el7 up to qemu-kvm-rhev-2.3.0-31.el7_2.25) 3. Create and start a virtual machine 4. Upgrade RHEL to RHEL-7.3 5. Restart the virtual machine Actual results: guest fails to restart, reports problem with "arat" flag. >Are we trying to avoid an existing problem with this or is this just >a theoretical exercise? AFAIK even partial upgrades from RHEL-x.y to >RHEL-x.y+n are not supported and yet very few packages actually try >to prevent users from doing it. I think it only makes sense if there >is a real issue resulting from a mixed environment. This is not a theoretical issue, it is a real problem. See BZ 1371617. (In reply to Daniel Berrange from comment #2) > I tend to agree we shouldn't do this. Libvirt is expected to work against > both the old & new QEMU, and if it didn't that would itself be considered a > bug in libvirt we would aim fix. I agree with you in the context of upstream, but downstream this is not supported, not tested by QE and, as Jeff pointed out in the previous two comments, results(ed) in bad customer experience in the field. I've seen resistance to the change being proposed, but no real reasons why it should not be implemented. Is there any technical problem with adding the requirements/conflicts to the package? See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1456235#c6 for some details how this would not make customer experience much better. Anyway, as I said in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1456235#c5 I'm not completely against conflicting with old qemu-kvm-rhev to prevent customer from upgrading RHEL underneath a layered product which has not been updated yet as a one-time workaround, but we should really make sure a proper solution is implemented for future releases. I am closing this as wont fix. - downstream patch was rejected - it brings more troubles that it solves - error message coming from conflicting rpm update would not really help customer to identify what is wrong - handling one of many libvirt's dependencies this way is not a solution for the real problem - issues have to be addressed at their primary source |