Bug 1321501 - fcoeadm -i prints an error message
Summary: fcoeadm -i prints an error message
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: libhbalinux
Version: 7.0
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Chris Leech
QA Contact: Red Hat Kernel QE team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-03-28 05:01 UTC by nikhil kshirsagar
Modified: 2021-09-03 13:48 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-04-05 09:11:48 UTC
Target Upstream Version:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description nikhil kshirsagar 2016-03-28 05:01:11 UTC
Description of problem:
[root@legspki01 yum.repos.d]# fcoeadm -i
fcoeadm: libHBAAPI or libhbalinux error

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
libhbalinux-1.0.17-2.el7.x86_64 

Additional info:
This seems the same issue as bz 700007. However that says that the issue is fixed in libhbalinux-1.0.10-3.el6 and the customer reports version libhbalinux-1.0.17-2.el7.x86_64 

Could this be a regression, or has the fix not gone into RHEL 7?

Comment 4 bwoods 2016-04-20 19:32:17 UTC
I am seeing the same issue...why was this closed as NOTABUG?

My software versions:

libhbaapi-.2.9-6.el7.x86_64
libhbalinux-1.0.17-2.el7.x86_64
fcoe-utils-1.0.30-3.git91c0c8c.el7.x86_64

What is going on here?

Comment 5 Chris Leech 2016-04-20 20:41:48 UTC
(In reply to bwoods from comment #4)
> I am seeing the same issue...why was this closed as NOTABUG?
> 
> My software versions:
> 
> libhbaapi-.2.9-6.el7.x86_64
> libhbalinux-1.0.17-2.el7.x86_64
> fcoe-utils-1.0.30-3.git91c0c8c.el7.x86_64
> 
> What is going on here?

It apparently was closed once it was discovered that the original report involved 3rd party driver additions on top of RHEL that we couldn't support.

If that's not true in your case, and you'd be willing to help debug, this could be re-opened.

For instance, if you could provide a copy of /etc/hba.conf from a failed system we could check this against bz 700007

Comment 6 bwoods 2016-04-20 22:08:38 UTC
I don't believe that is true in my case. My /etc/hba.conf contains nothing but comments:

#
# This file contains names and references to HBA libraries
#
# Format:
#
# <library name>  <library pathname>
#
# The library name should be prepended with the domain of
# the manufacturer or driver author.
#
# 32bit/64bit implementation note:
#   If a 32bit implementation tries to load a 64 bit library,
#   the load will fail with the result that the 64 bit vendor
#   library is ignored.
#   Likewise, if a 64bit implementation tries to load a 32 bit library,
#   the load will fail with the result that the 32 bit vendor
#   library is ignored.



# Set a debug level (depends on compilation switches)
#
# Format:
#
# "debuglevel"    <debug level>
#
# 0 is default, 1 show vendor library opens,
# 2 shows function calls, 3 shows callback events
#
# Uncomment the next line to specify a level
#debuglevel 3

Comment 7 rmathias 2016-09-07 14:21:00 UTC
I am suffering from this bug as well. Has there been any progress made since bwoods attached the hba.conf? My hda.conf is default as well and fcoeadm -i errors out in the same error message.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.