Bug 1878665

Summary:	Hypervisor with 0 socket is submitted via Yupana to HBI and tally is broken
Product:	Red Hat Hybrid Cloud Console (console.redhat.com)	Reporter:	Sanket Jagtap <sjagtap>
Component:	Subscription Watch	Assignee:	Michael Stead <mstead>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	Jon Allen <jallen>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	unspecified	CC:	apatel, bcourt, mstead, sghai, sshtein, wpinheir
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	SubscriptionWatch, Triaged
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:	2020-10-15 12:19:01 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 Sanket Jagtap 2020-09-14 10:13:15 UTC

Description of problem:
There are two means to bring hypervisor hosts to HBI in Subwatch ,
1. Yupana (Satellite)
2. RHSM-Conduit (RHSM)

If any Hypervisor with 0 socket counts makes it way to HBI, the next tally onwards on the account fails

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Have a hypervisor with 0 socket submitted via yupana
2.
3.

Actual results:
Tally breaks and account is not tallied. 
PFA to see the trace and log

Expected results:
There should be validation happening to detect the 0 hypervisor socket and stop it from being submitted to HBI. 
Currently, there is validation at rhsm-conduit, there should be the same in yupana aswell. 

Additional info:
This only affects the hypervisors submitted via Yupana, i.e Red hat Cloud Satellite Plugin.

Comment 2 Michael Stead 2020-09-25 13:35:16 UTC

This has been addressed in rhsm-subscriptions such that a tally run will not fail when a host is processed in this state. The end result is that Tally will record the host with 0 sockets (for discovery if need be) but the API should filter then as it has already been doing.

As far as I know, the hypervisor host is not currently being validated in Yupana as suggested by the reporter to prevent the host from reaching HBI (as rhsm-conduit is doing).

I'm going to leave this bug open until this has been addressed.

Comment 3 Anurag Patel 2020-09-25 15:10:58 UTC

The 0 socket count issue is being addressed in foreman-rhcloud as well. To ensure sanity of data, we should filter these in Yupana as well. Do we have a spec on which system facts similar to `cpu::cpu_socket(s)` should be inspected and dropped?

Comment 4 Sanket Jagtap 2020-09-28 08:27:04 UTC

Do we have a bugzilla for foreman-rhcloud ? If not I think we should create as it would be a two part fix and easier to cherrypick in other versions of the plugin , Can we add it to see also in here, for better tracking.

Comment 7 Barnaby Court 2020-10-15 12:19:01 UTC

Fix in Tally was pushed to production.