Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||Rebase virt-what in RHEL 6.2|
|Product:||Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6||Reporter:||Richard W.M. Jones <rjones>|
|Component:||virt-what||Assignee:||Richard W.M. Jones <rjones>|
|Status:||CLOSED ERRATA||QA Contact:||Virtualization Bugs <virt-bugs>|
|Version:||6.2||CC:||jzheng, leiwang, pcao, qwan|
|Fixed In Version:||virt-what-1.11-1.1.el6||Doc Type:||Rebase: Bug Fixes and Enhancements|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2011-12-06 04:57:47 EST||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:|
|Bug Blocks:||671510, 707524|
Description Richard W.M. Jones 2011-01-24 07:20:20 EST
Since we're now carrying 18 patches over virt-what 1.3, we should rebase virt-what in the next release of RHEL (6.2). virt-what upstream is very conservatively implemented so that we always present a stable API (and "ABI") to callers. The main work goes on adding support for new hypervisors. We now have detailed regression tests for many hypervisors which should catch regressions upstream.
Comment 2 Richard W.M. Jones 2011-06-20 10:03:52 EDT
No pm-ack, so no rebase ...
Comment 4 Richard W.M. Jones 2011-06-24 06:24:57 EDT
https://brewweb.devel.redhat.com/taskinfo?taskID=3427278 I have pushed this early so that QA can begin on this package as soon as possible. NOTE regressions in this package could also affect subscription-manager! The rebased virt-what is the same as upstream virt-what 1.11 + the single patch that was added to git after 1.11 was released. In other words, it's the same as upstream git d87e9cbae. Upstream git repo: http://git.annexia.org/?p=virt-what.git;a=summary Upstream tarballs: http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-what/files/
Comment 8 Jinxin Zheng 2011-07-22 05:12:07 EDT
virt-what-1.11-1.1.el6.i686/x86_64 on RHEL 6 host. # virt-what kvm virt-what-1.11-1.1.el6.i686/x86_64 on RHEL 5 host. # virt-what kvm
Comment 9 Jinxin Zheng 2011-07-22 05:12:40 EDT
virt-what-1.11-1.1.el6.i686/x86_64 on Xen host. PV: # virt-what xen HVM: # virt-what xen xen-hvm
Comment 10 Jinxin Zheng 2011-07-22 05:13:00 EDT
virt-what-1.11-1.1.el6.i686/x86_64 on ESX 3.5 host. # virt-what vmware virt-what-1.11-1.1.el6.i686/x86_64 on ESX 4.0 host. # virt-what vmware
Comment 11 Jinxin Zheng 2011-07-22 05:13:18 EDT
virt-what-1.11-1.1.el6.i686 on PowerVM x86 world. # virt-what powervm_lx86
Comment 12 Jinxin Zheng 2011-07-22 05:13:37 EDT
virt-what-1.11-1.1.el6.s390x on SystemZ (s390x-6s-v1.ss.eng.bos.redhat.com). # virt-what ibm_systemz ibm_systemz-zvm
Comment 13 Jinxin Zheng 2011-07-22 05:14:13 EDT
Hyper-V host environment is being setting up. It should be done within 1 or 2 days.
Comment 14 Richard W.M. Jones 2011-07-22 05:22:03 EDT
(In reply to comment #9) > virt-what-1.11-1.1.el6.i686/x86_64 on Xen host. > > PV: > # virt-what > xen This one is wrong. Assuming this is a RHEL 6 guest (domU) running on a Xen hypervisor, the output should be: # virt-what xen xen-domU Can you double-check this one? If it's still failing, can you give me some more details of the Xen host: Is it RHEL 5? Is it Citrix Xen? Can I get a login to this guest?
Comment 15 Jinxin Zheng 2011-07-22 06:15:53 EDT
I re-checked it. Still no 'xen-domU', either 32 or 64 guest. It's RHEL6, not RHEL5 or Citrix.
Comment 16 Richard W.M. Jones 2011-07-22 06:28:05 EDT
Thanks for checking this again. I had a look at this guest, and of course being RHEL 6.1 it's using pv_ops. This is in fact a known bug / shortcoming in virt-what (see ). We don't know how to tell the difference between dom0 and domU with pv_ops kernels -- it's probably doable but we don't know how. So don't worry about this test. As long as it prints 'xen' we're OK.  http://git.annexia.org/?p=virt-what.git;a=blob;f=virt-what.in;h=4f381ab4c38cd9d38861a0fbfe764d2c5d5c59b4;hb=HEAD#l190
Comment 17 Jinxin Zheng 2011-07-25 00:56:34 EDT
virt-what-1.11-1.1.el6.i686/x86_64 on Hyper-V. # virt-what hyperv Now all the hypervisors and guests are tested, moving this to VERIFIED.
Comment 18 errata-xmlrpc 2011-12-06 04:57:47 EST
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2011-1556.html