Bug 1875045

Summary: [sig-storage] PersistentVolumes-local [Volume type: blockfswithoutformat] One pod requesting one prebound PVC should be able to mount volume and read from pod1
Product: OpenShift Container Platform Reporter: David Eads <deads>
Component: StorageAssignee: Tomas Smetana <tsmetana>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Qin Ping <piqin>
Severity: urgent Docs Contact:
Priority: urgent    
Version: 4.6CC: aos-bugs, chuffman
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: 4.7.0   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
[sig-storage] PersistentVolumes-local [Volume type: blockfswithoutformat] One pod requesting one prebound PVC should be able to mount volume and read from pod1
Last Closed: 2020-09-22 15:16:34 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 David Eads 2020-09-02 20:21:59 UTC 
test:
[sig-storage] PersistentVolumes-local  [Volume type: blockfswithoutformat] One pod requesting one prebound PVC should be able to mount volume and read from pod1 

is failing frequently in CI, see search results:
https://search.ci.openshift.org/?maxAge=168h&context=1&type=junit&maxMatches=5&maxBytes=20971520&groupBy=job&name=4.6.*rt|rt.*4.6&search=%5C%5Bsig-storage%5C%5D+PersistentVolumes-local++%5C%5BVolume+type%3A+blockfswithoutformat%5C%5D+One+pod+requesting+one+prebound+PVC+should+be+able+to+mount+volume+and+read+from+pod1

sippy reports this is failing in 20% of rt runs that attempt it here: https://testgrid.k8s.io/redhat-openshift-ocp-release-4.6-informing#release-openshift-ocp-installer-e2e-gcp-rt-4.6

There appear to be several that fail in a group with similar error messages.  Have a look at  https://prow.ci.openshift.org/view/gcs/origin-ci-test/logs/release-openshift-ocp-installer-e2e-gcp-rt-4.6/1300323217805676544 for instance
Comment 8 Tomas Smetana 2020-09-22 15:16:34 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1879152 ***