Bug 1139373
| Summary: | sanlock.get_hosts() off-by-one error when specifying the hostId argument | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 | Reporter: | Jan Kurik <jkurik> |
| Component: | sanlock | Assignee: | David Teigland <teigland> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Elad <ebenahar> |
| Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | high | ||
| Version: | 6.5 | CC: | acanan, agk, amureini, benl, cluster-maint, ebenahar, gklein, jharriga, jherrman, jkurik, nsoffer, pm-eus, salmy, scohen, teigland, tlavigne |
| Target Milestone: | rc | Keywords: | ZStream |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: |
Prior to this update, an off-by-one error caused the sanlock.get_hosts() function to return incorrect information about the host when it was used with the host_id argument. This error has been fixed and sanlock.get_hosts() returns the correct information when host_id is used.
|
Story Points: | --- |
| Clone Of: | 1111210 | Environment: | |
| Last Closed: | 2015-06-01 12:24:39 UTC | Type: | --- |
| 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: | 1111210 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 1131192, 1131194 | ||
|
Description
Jan Kurik
2014-09-08 19:28:53 UTC
I don't know what happens to it. (In reply to David Teigland from comment #4) > I don't know what happens to it. What is needed to get the fix in rhel6.5.z? It seems that we have all the acks. Do we have a build? (In reply to Nir Soffer from comment #5) > (In reply to David Teigland from comment #4) > > I don't know what happens to it. > > What is needed to get the fix in rhel6.5.z? It seems that we have all the > acks. Do we have a build? There is a 6.6 build. Do I create a 6.5.z build, if so how? If there's something more I need to do, someone please let me know. with a lot of help I've managed to create a zstream build for this: https://brewweb.devel.redhat.com/taskinfo?taskID=8337595 I'm waiting to find out if an errata is needed and if so how to create it. Hi, In order to verify I need the following details: - which OS should I test on? RHEL6.5.1? - Sanlock build - vdsm build (3.4/3.5) Regardong to reproduction steps - will the steps described in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111210#c16 be good? Thanks (In reply to Elad from comment #16) > - which OS should I test on? RHEL6.5.1? All supported platforms > - Sanlock build David, can you help with this? > - vdsm build (3.4/3.5) Does not matter, vdsm does not use yet the fixed version. > Regardong to reproduction steps - will the steps described in > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111210#c16 be good? Yes There's a link to the build in comment 13, sanlock-2.8-2.el6_5 sanlock.get_hosts function returns the right host id: >>> sanlock.get_hosts('51ab53aa-9b94-4dec-b180-01a0c9de8915') [{'generation': 7, 'host_id': 1, 'flags': 3, 'io_timeout': 10, 'timestamp': 1336}, {'generation': 2, 'host_id': 2, 'flags': 3, 'io_timeout': 10, 'timestamp': 1620141}] >>> sanlock.get_hosts('51ab53aa-9b94-4dec-b180-01a0c9de8915', 1) [{'generation': 7, 'host_id': 1, 'flags': 3, 'io_timeout': 10, 'timestamp': 1336}] The host id is 1: vdsm.log: 171ca5ae-273b-43b5-b381-c1f228cba21b::DEBUG::2015-01-12 08:44:42,629::clusterlock::240::Storage.SANLock::(acquireHostId) Host id for domain 51ab53aa-9b94-4dec-b180-01a0c9de8915 successfully acquired (id: 1) Verified using: RHEL6.6 sanlock-2.8-2.el6_5.x86_64 rhev 3.5 vt13.6 vdsm-4.16.8.1-5.el6ev.x86_64 Redirecting the need-info Elad, may I ask you please to move the errata to REL_PREP ? (In reply to Jan Kurik from comment #24) > Elad, may I ask you please to move the errata to REL_PREP ? I'll take care of this 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. https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2015-1038.html |