Bug 1948500
| Summary: | Tpm model should be tpm-crb for x86_64 and tpm-spapr for ppc(RHV) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [oVirt] ovirt-engine | Reporter: | Yanqiu Zhang <yanqzhan> |
| Component: | BLL.Virt | Assignee: | Milan Zamazal <mzamazal> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Tamir <tamir> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 4.4.6 | CC: | ahadas, bugs, chhu, juzhou, lsurette, srevivo, yanqzhan, ycui |
| Target Milestone: | ovirt-4.4.6 | Flags: | pm-rhel:
ovirt-4.4+
|
| Target Release: | 4.4.6.4 | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | libvirt_RHV_INT | ||
| Fixed In Version: | ovirt-engine-4.4.6.4 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2021-05-05 05:36:00 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | Virt | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
actually not specific to PPC but please note that this needs to be tested also on PPC Verified on RHV 4.4.6-5. All looks good to me.
Checked both on a x86 env and PPC env.
Env:
x86 env:
- Engine instance with RHV 4.4.6-5 (ovirt-engine-4.4.6.5-447.gd80dda7.9.el8ev) and RHEL 8.4 installed.
- 3 hosts with RHV 4.4.6-5 and RHEL 8.4, vdsm-4.40.60.4-1.el8ev
PPC (Power 8) env:
- Engine instance with RHV 4.4.6-5 (ovirt-engine-4.4.6.5-447.gd80dda7.9.el8ev) and RHEL 8.4 installed.
- 2 hosts with RHV 4.4.6-5 and RHEL 8.4, vdsm-4.40.60.4-1.el8ev
Steps for x86:
In Admin Portal:
1. Create a 4.6 data center and a 4.6 cluster.
2. Install the host and create a new NFS storage domain.
3. Create a VM with disk and bios type UEFI and with TPM enabled.
4. Run the VM.
5. Check that the tpm section in the VM XML has the tpm-crb set as it's model.
Results (As Expected):
1. The 4.6 data center and the 4.6 cluster were created.
2. The host was installed and the NFS storage domain was created.
3. The VM was created.
4. The VM is running.
5. The TPM model is "tpm-crb":
<tpm model='tpm-crb'>
<backend type='emulator' version='2.0'/>
<alias name='ua-f948fd5d-83ad-45c8-9dfe-5e1cb367637d'/>
</tpm>
Steps for PPC:
In Admin Portal:
1. Create a 4.6 data center and a 4.6 cluster.
2. Install the host and create a new NFS storage domain.
3. Create a VM with disk and bios type pseries and with TPM enabled.
4. Run the VM.
5. Check that the tpm section in the VM XML has the tpm-spapr set as it's model.
Results (As Expected):
1. The 4.6 data center and the 4.6 cluster were created.
2. The host was installed and the NFS storage domain was created.
3. The VM was created.
4. The VM is running.
5. The TPM model is "tpm-spapr":
<tpm model='tpm-spapr'>
<backend type='emulator' version='2.0'/>
<alias name='ua-c7787f1f-dc2f-4fbb-ae10-9543f0c27728'/>
<address type='spapr-vio' reg='0x00004000'/>
</tpm>
This bugzilla is included in oVirt 4.4.6 release, published on May 4th 2021. Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in oVirt 4.4.6 release, it has been closed with a resolution of CURRENT RELEASE. If the solution does not work for you, please open a new bug report. |
Description of problem: Tpm model should be tpm-crb for x86_64 and tpm-spapr for ppc(RHV) Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): vdsm-4.40.60.2-1.el8ev.x86_64 libvirt-7.0.0-13.module+el8.4.0+10604+5608c2b4.x86_64 qemu-kvm-5.2.0-14.module+el8.4.0+10425+ad586fa5.x86_64 ovirt-engine-4.4.6.1-0.11.el8ev.noarch How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. In UEFI cluster, edit a vm to add tpm device: Resource allocation, tick 'TPM device enabled', save. 2. Run the vm, check vm xml <tpm model='tpm-tis'> <backend type='emulator' version='2.0'/> <alias name='ua-6625b8fa-ab39-4882-9ee6-f56f056dba02'/> </tpm> Actual results: tpm model is tpm-tis Expected results: Tpm model should be tpm-crb for x86_64 and tpm-spapr for ppc(RHV) REF: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519013#c20 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781913