Bug 961032

Summary:	[sanlock] wdmd should select correct watchdog device
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6	Reporter:	David Teigland <teigland>
Component:	sanlock	Assignee:	David Teigland <teigland>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Leonid Natapov <lnatapov>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	6.4	CC:	cluster-maint, fsimonce, teigland
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	sanlock-2.8-1	Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2013-11-21 11:49:04 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 David Teigland 2013-05-08 15:06:41 UTC

Description of problem:

On some systems, multiple watchdog devices appear, some functional and some not.
wdmd needs to select the one that works.

See Fedora bug 878119

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


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
  
Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 1 David Teigland 2013-06-26 16:32:19 UTC

For more information about testing this, see fedora bug 878119.
You need watchdog hardware that exposes both /dev/watchdog0 and
/dev/watchdog1, where watchdog0 is not fully functional.

Comment 4 Leonid Natapov 2013-08-26 13:05:36 UTC

(In reply to David Teigland from comment #1)
> For more information about testing this, see fedora bug 878119.
> You need watchdog hardware that exposes both /dev/watchdog0 and
> /dev/watchdog1, where watchdog0 is not fully functional.

David,can we test it without watchdog hardware ?

Comment 5 David Teigland 2013-08-26 14:47:12 UTC

I would just ensure there are no regressions in the existing tests.
It may not be feasible to find and test with hardware that exposts
the dual watchdogs.

Comment 6 Leonid Natapov 2013-08-27 13:07:46 UTC

sanlock-2.8-1.el6.x86_64. No regressions were found.

Comment 8 errata-xmlrpc 2013-11-21 11:49:04 UTC

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/RHBA-2013-1632.html