Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0. The upgrade date is tentatively scheduled for 2 December 2018, pending final testing and feedback.
Bug 1509079 - Revise collected files for VDO plugin for SOS
Revise collected files for VDO plugin for SOS
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: sos (Show other bugs)
7.5
Unspecified Unspecified
high Severity unspecified
: rc
: ---
Assigned To: Pavel Moravec
Maryna Nalbandian
: OtherQA
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2017-11-02 17:49 EDT by Bryan Gurney
Modified: 2018-04-10 14:07 EDT (History)
8 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version: sos-3.5-2.el7
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-04-10 14:05:49 EDT
Type: Bug
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---
salmy: needinfo+


Attachments (Terms of Use)


External Trackers
Tracker ID Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Github sosreport/sos/pull/1134 None None None 2017-11-07 08:34 EST
Red Hat Product Errata RHEA-2018:0963 None None None 2018-04-10 14:07 EDT

  None (edit)
Description Bryan Gurney 2017-11-02 17:49:19 EDT
Description of problem:
On a test, I found that the sosreport plugin was able to collect the output of "vdo status", but it did not collect the sysfs directories (or those directories weren't were we expected them to be).

The following items need to be changed in vdo.py under the "files" section:

'/sys/vdo': change to '/sys/kvdo'
'/sys/albireo': change to '/sys/uds'


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
sos-3.5-1.el7.noarch

How reproducible:
100% reproducible

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Create a VDO volume with "vdo create --name=vdo1 --device=/dev/sdb" (or an appropriate block device.
2. Run "sosreport".  Enter the necessary information to allow the report to complete.
3. Extract the contents of the resulting sosreport tarball into a test directory.

Actual results:
There are no VDO-related sysfs subdirectories in the "./sys" subdirectory of the sosreport tarball.

Expected results:
The "kvdo" and "uds" directories appear in the "./sys" subdirectory of the sosreport tarball.

Additional info:
Comment 2 Pavel Moravec 2017-11-06 05:51:35 EST
(In reply to Bryan Gurney from comment #0)
> The following items need to be changed in vdo.py under the "files" section:
> 
> '/sys/vdo': change to '/sys/kvdo'
> '/sys/albireo': change to '/sys/uds'

Shall we collect only the new locations or both (i.e. if some older version of VDO uses the old paths)?

Is this required since RHEL 7.5 already? (there will be quite probably a package re-spin where I can include this BZ)
Comment 3 Bryn M. Reeves 2017-11-06 06:21:06 EST
As with bug 1491805: depends on whether we actually expect to find the old paths present on RHEL installations. We can also add this upstream is there may be users on other distributions running older versions.
Comment 4 Bryan Gurney 2017-11-06 08:35:37 EST
We should collect only the new locations, '/sys/kvdo' and '/sys/uds'.

It is required for RHEL 7.5.  Most of the diagnostic info can be collected via the kernel logs and the "vdo status" command output, but there's some important info in the sysfs directories that are important in a support case.
Comment 5 Bryan Gurney 2017-11-06 08:43:47 EST
(In reply to Bryn M. Reeves from comment #3)
> As with bug 1491805: depends on whether we actually expect to find the old
> paths present on RHEL installations. We can also add this upstream is there
> may be users on other distributions running older versions.

For older versions of VDO, only the '/sys/kvdo' path will be present.
Comment 6 Pavel Moravec 2017-11-07 08:34:17 EST
Bryan, could you pls. (promise to) verify this BZ once a build will be enabled? To simplify QE work..
Comment 7 Bryan Gurney 2017-11-07 09:00:06 EST
(In reply to Pavel Moravec from comment #6)
> Bryan, could you pls. (promise to) verify this BZ once a build will be
> enabled? To simplify QE work..

Oh yes, I'm definitely running sosreport with this new build once it's available.  (That's exactly how I found out that the sysfs directories weren't being collected.)
Comment 8 Miroslav Hradílek 2017-11-08 02:48:39 EST
Granting qa_ack based on OtherQE commitment in comment 7.
Comment 9 Pavel Moravec 2017-11-08 13:26:51 EST
Steve,
could you please pm_ack+ this BZ for RHEL7.5 as otherwise original https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491805 would have to fail QE? (this BZ fixes some defect in requirements of that BZ)
Comment 12 Bryan Gurney 2017-12-11 10:36:01 EST
Looks good; I can see the files in /sys/kvdo and /sys/uds reflected in an sosreport.
Comment 17 errata-xmlrpc 2018-04-10 14:05:49 EDT
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/RHEA-2018:0963

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