Hide Forgot
Description of problem: In an sbd-setup where the watchdog is set to poweroff the node and fencing-action off is issued for a node via a shared-disk. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): sbd-1.3.0-3.el7 How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. setup virtual cluster using qemu-kvm 2. configure sbd using a shared disk 3. pcs stonith update {sbd-fencing-resource} method=onoff 4. pcs property set stonith-action=poweroff 3. pcs stonith fence {target-node} Actual results: fenced node reboots instead of shutting down Expected results: fenced node should shut down Additional info: mentioned reproduction via qemu-kvm as it is basically a race that might not be 100% reproducible on other platforms
Fixed upstream already just missed it for 7.4.
Steven: Guess that mixes up things now. It really has to be distinguished between watchdog-configuration, what fencing is configured and what subsequently is signalled via poison-pill to the other side. Guess you wanted it to be nearer to the test that lead to discovering the issue. My approach was rather to describe which part of that went wrong and fixed now - so that other use-cases that trigger the same thing would be easier to detect/understand. I'll think over it under that light again tomorrow.
Steven: Tried to modify the 'Doc Text' in the direction of your suggestion starting with the explicit use-case that is now working and describing a little bit what has been fixed under the hood in the paragraph following. One semantic question arises: A watchdog is triggered (kicked) to stay calm and it triggers an action when it runs off - at least in my understanding of the words. Maybe 'trigger' should thus rather not be used in favour of 'kick' for the one thing and something like 'run off' for the other. But I'm not sure and we should probably do it consistently.
Klaus: The first line of the description in the doc text becomes a title for the entry, and there is a character limit. So I had to shorten the sentence to its first phrase (what the user will see at a quick glance) but moved the whole original sentence to the end of the description, since that's what this leads to. I think that for the purposes of this release note your phrasing is fine as it. It's really just to let somebody know what the problem was and the nature of the fix, and I think this is clear enough.
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://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2018:0924