Bug 2196271
Summary: | system broken after failed installation of glibc-2.34-66.el9.x86_64.rpm on xcp-ng 8.2.1 on AMD CPU | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | Reporter: | anshockm |
Component: | glibc | Assignee: | glibc team <glibc-bugzilla> |
Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | qe-baseos-tools-bugs |
Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | CentOS Stream | CC: | akrherz, ashankar, bstinson, codonell, dj, fweimer, jwboyer, mnewsome, pfrankli, sipoyare, skolosov |
Target Milestone: | rc | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2023-05-19 13:09:13 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: | |||
Attachments: |
Description
anshockm
2023-05-08 14:10:57 UTC
Would you please attach “ld.so --list-diagnostics” and “ld.so --list-tunables” output? From before the update if the command does not work afterwards. Thanks. Created attachment 1963250 [details]
output of “ld.so --list-diagnostics” and “ld.so --list-tunables” before update
Thank you. Would you mind testing this newer build? https://kojihub.stream.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=32228 It contains this change from upstream, which might help here as well: - x86: Check minimum/maximum of non_temporal_threshold [BZ #29953] Unfortunately, I cannot easily test on such a hypervisor. Another potentially helpful data point would be whether the issue reproduces with a Fedora rawhide container image (e.g., registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide). It helps! [root@vm839 ~]# ls -l glibc-* -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 2008067 May 8 16:47 glibc-2.34-67.el9.x86_64.rpm -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 316188 May 8 16:47 glibc-common-2.34-67.el9.x86_64.rpm -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1629451 May 8 16:47 glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-67.el9.x86_64.rpm -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 587024 May 8 16:47 glibc-langpack-de-2.34-67.el9.x86_64.rpm [root@vm839 ~]# dnf install ./glibc* Last metadata expiration check: 0:51:00 ago on Mon May 8 15:56:19 2023. Dependencies resolved. =============================================================================================================================================================== Package Architecture Version Repository Size =============================================================================================================================================================== Upgrading: glibc x86_64 2.34-67.el9 @commandline 1.9 M glibc-common x86_64 2.34-67.el9 @commandline 309 k glibc-gconv-extra x86_64 2.34-67.el9 @commandline 1.6 M glibc-langpack-de x86_64 2.34-67.el9 @commandline 573 k Transaction Summary =============================================================================================================================================================== Upgrade 4 Packages Total size: 4.3 M Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: Running transaction check Transaction check succeeded. Running transaction test Transaction test succeeded. Running transaction Preparing : 1/1 Upgrading : glibc-common-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 1/8 Upgrading : glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 2/8 Running scriptlet: glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 2/8 Upgrading : glibc-langpack-de-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 3/8 Running scriptlet: glibc-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 4/8 Upgrading : glibc-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 4/8 Running scriptlet: glibc-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 4/8 Cleanup : glibc-2.34-65.el9.x86_64 5/8 Cleanup : glibc-langpack-de-2.34-65.el9.x86_64 6/8 Cleanup : glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-65.el9.x86_64 7/8 Running scriptlet: glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-65.el9.x86_64 7/8 Cleanup : glibc-common-2.34-65.el9.x86_64 8/8 Running scriptlet: glibc-common-2.34-65.el9.x86_64 8/8 Verifying : glibc-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 1/8 Verifying : glibc-2.34-65.el9.x86_64 2/8 Verifying : glibc-common-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 3/8 Verifying : glibc-common-2.34-65.el9.x86_64 4/8 Verifying : glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 5/8 Verifying : glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-65.el9.x86_64 6/8 Verifying : glibc-langpack-de-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 7/8 Verifying : glibc-langpack-de-2.34-65.el9.x86_64 8/8 Upgraded: glibc-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 glibc-common-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 glibc-langpack-de-2.34-67.el9.x86_64 Complete! [root@vm839 ~]# Thank you for checking. So it was the result of an unfortunate backporting order. Would you mind attaching the new output of “ld.so --list-diagnostics“ and “ld.so --list-tunables”? I wonder if the non-temporal threshold has changed in a drastic way. Thanks. Created attachment 1963254 [details]
ld.so output from the failed system
Created attachment 1963256 [details]
ld.so output from the updated good system
(In reply to anshockm from comment #6) > Created attachment 1963254 [details] > ld.so output from the failed system Are you sure this is the right file? I would expect x86.cpu_features.non_temporal_threshold=0x4040 only after the fix was in. The computed value is likely lower than 0x4040 without the fix. Created attachment 1963257 [details]
ld.so output from the failed system (now the right version)
cut-and-paste error. Sorry!
I'm marking this CLOSED / DUPLICATE of 2177705 since the setup of a default threshold fixes this issue and is available in the -67 build. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 2177705 *** |