Bug 1934312

Summary:	facts discrepancy between cpu.cpu_socket(s) and lscpu.socket(s) on aarch64
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8	Reporter:	John Sefler <jsefler>
Component:	subscription-manager	Assignee:	candlepin-bugs
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	Red Hat subscription-manager QE Team <rhsm-qe>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	---	CC:	redakkan, tmerry
Target Milestone:	rc	Keywords:	Reopened
Target Release:	---	Flags:	pm-rhel: mirror+
Hardware:	aarch64
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2023-07-18 09:20:15 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:	1852789
Bug Blocks:

Comment 3 John Sefler 2021-08-06 15:31:44 UTC

Comment 2 should be handled separately in new bug 1990918 for ibm_power-lpar systems.

Comment 4 John Sefler 2021-08-06 15:38:50 UTC

This bug should probably be CLOSED DUPLICATE of Bug 1891651

Comment 5 Rehana 2021-08-12 13:54:15 UTC


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1891651 ***

Comment 6 John Sefler 2021-11-05 13:54:55 UTC

The fix for this bug will depend on bug 1852789 as determined during the work on bug 1891651

Comment 7 John Sefler 2021-11-05 14:00:55 UTC

Upon further review, it not clear to me that the machine in comment 1 is an "is_a64fx" system and therefore the fix for bug 1891651 will probably not fix this bug because the code fix in https://github.com/candlepin/subscription-manager/pull/2719/files shows that the fix is tightly bound to MIDR_EL1 for a FX700 or FX1000 system from Fujitsu.  I doubt that the machine in comment 1 was a FX700 or FX1000 system.

For this reason, I am removing the closed duplicate status.

Comment 15 RHEL Program Management 2023-04-30 07:28:12 UTC

After evaluating this issue, there are no plans to address it further or fix it in an upcoming release.  Therefore, it is being closed.  If plans change such that this issue will be fixed in an upcoming release, then the bug can be reopened.