RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 1561662 - zfcp.allow_lun_scan=0 is not carried forward to installed system
Summary: zfcp.allow_lun_scan=0 is not carried forward to installed system
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: anaconda
Version: 7.5
Hardware: s390x
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: 7.6
Assignee: Vendula Poncova
QA Contact: Release Test Team
Sharon Moroney
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1275658 1477564 1513404 1557360
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2018-03-28 16:29 UTC by Jan Stodola
Modified: 2018-10-30 07:55 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version: anaconda-21.48.22.140-1
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Installation started with boot option "zfcp.allow_lun_scan" is applied to the installed system Previously, the boot option "zfcp.allow_lun_scan" was not applied to the installed system and as a result, the installed system started without the boot option. This update applies the boot option "zfcp.allow_lun_scan" to the installed system.
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-10-30 07:52:43 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
IBM Linux Technology Center 166203 0 None None None 2018-03-29 08:07:27 UTC
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2018:3035 0 None None None 2018-10-30 07:55:12 UTC

Description Jan Stodola 2018-03-28 16:29:33 UTC 
Description of problem:
When the installation on s390x is started with the zfcp.allow_lun_scan=0 kernel boot parameter, the parameter should be applied on the installed system as well. But it's not.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
RHEL-7.5
anaconda-21.48.22.134-1.el7

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. start the installation with the zfcp.allow_lun_scan=0 kernel parameter
2. finish the installation
3. check if the zfcp kernel module was loaded with the allow_lun_scan parameter disabled

Actual results:
# cat /sys/module/zfcp/parameters/allow_lun_scan
Y
#

Expected results:
# cat /sys/module/zfcp/parameters/allow_lun_scan 
N
#


Proposed patch:

diff --git a/pyanaconda/bootloader.py b/pyanaconda/bootloader.py
index 1ef3941..0b81344 100644
--- a/pyanaconda/bootloader.py
+++ b/pyanaconda/bootloader.py
@@ -2132,7 +2132,7 @@ class ZIPL(BootLoader):
             return ["ext4", "ext3", "ext2", "xfs"]
 
     image_label_attr = "short_label"
-    preserve_args = ["cio_ignore", "rd.znet", "rd_ZNET"]
+    preserve_args = ["cio_ignore", "rd.znet", "rd_ZNET", "zfcp.allow_lun_scan"]
 
     def __init__(self):
         super(ZIPL, self).__init__()
Comment 1 Dan Horák 2018-03-28 16:45:07 UTC 
Thanks for the test, Jan. Same fix should go into Fedora. The question might be whether anaconda shouldn't preserve all parameters except those it uses for itself.
Comment 2 IBM Bug Proxy 2018-03-29 08:41:10 UTC 
------- Comment From MAIER.com 2018-03-29 04:36 EDT-------
(In reply to comment #4)
> Description of problem:
> When the installation on s390x is started with the zfcp.allow_lun_scan=0
> kernel boot parameter, the parameter should be applied on the installed
> system as well. But it's not.
>
> Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
> RHEL-7.5
> anaconda-21.48.22.134-1.el7

> Proposed patch:
>
> diff --git a/pyanaconda/bootloader.py b/pyanaconda/bootloader.py
> index 1ef3941..0b81344 100644
> --- a/pyanaconda/bootloader.py
> +++ b/pyanaconda/bootloader.py
> @@ -2132,7 +2132,7 @@ class ZIPL(BootLoader):
> return ["ext4", "ext3", "ext2", "xfs"]
>
> image_label_attr = "short_label"
> -    preserve_args = ["cio_ignore", "rd.znet", "rd_ZNET"]
> +    preserve_args = ["cio_ignore", "rd.znet", "rd_ZNET",
> "zfcp.allow_lun_scan"]
>
> def __init__(self):
> super(ZIPL, self).__init__()
>
> Thanks for the test, Jan. Same fix should go into Fedora. The question might
> be whether anaconda shouldn't preserve all parameters except those it uses
> for itself.

+1 for Dan's suggestion. Zfcp has more options and there are enough other kernel parameters which a user likely expects to be carried over.
Also this would be consistent to how the kernel processes its cmdline by only consuming options it parsed and understood itself.
Comment 3 Vendula Poncova 2018-05-17 15:37:27 UTC 
Fixed in a pull request: https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/pull/1481
Comment 5 Jan Stodola 2018-07-04 15:15:52 UTC 
zfcp.allow_lun_scan=0 is present on the kernel command line of the installed system if the parameter was present during the installation.
Tested with anaconda-21.48.22.143-2.el7, moving to VERIFIED.
Comment 10 errata-xmlrpc 2018-10-30 07:52:43 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.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2018:3035
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.