Bug 1634165
| Summary: | fc rescan issue when looking at specific hbas | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat OpenStack | Reporter: | Alan Bishop <abishop> |
| Component: | python-os-brick | Assignee: | Alan Bishop <abishop> |
| Status: | CLOSED EOL | QA Contact: | Tzach Shefi <tshefi> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 8.0 (Liberty) | CC: | aavraham, abishop, apevec, geguileo, jschluet, lhh, mgeary, nlevinki, pmorey, svigan, tshefi |
| Target Milestone: | zstream | Keywords: | Triaged, ZStream |
| Target Release: | 8.0 (Liberty) | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | python-os-brick-0.5.0-8.el7ost | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: |
Previously, the os-brick code for scanning FibreChannel HBA hosts returned an invalid value under certain circumstances.
Services such as cinder and nova failed due to the invalid value.
Now, the FibreChannel HBA scan code returns a valid value. Cinder and nova no longer crash when scanning FibreChannel HBA hosts.
|
Story Points: | --- |
| Clone Of: | 1634164 | Environment: | |
| Last Closed: | 2019-05-01 20:40:47 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: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | 1630842, 1631024, 1634163, 1634164 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
|
Description
Alan Bishop
2018-09-28 20:36:33 UTC
Hi Alan, Need some clarification on bz verification steps Does it matter which FC back end/driver I use to test this? "specific HBA" would this only hit some HBA's, if so which mfg/model did we hit this on? How do I trigger the issue which was fixed ? Attach FC vol to instance? Noticed LP mentions "only connected HBA's", is this relevant for verification? My BM nodes all have a single (dual port) HBA, I can disconnect one of the dual ports if it helps. Tzach, I'm afraid I don't have any useful info. This BZ is basically a backport of an upstream fix for a regression introduced by a prior patch related to FC HBA scanning. You might find some clues in the commit message (see https://review.openstack.org/571910). Gorka, do you have any thoughts on this? |