Bug 1871161 - Assigning Tagged VLAN VM Networks to a Hosts bonded network interface fails
Summary: Assigning Tagged VLAN VM Networks to a Hosts bonded network interface fails
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1860479
Alias: None
Product: ovirt-engine
Classification: oVirt
Component: General
Version: 4.4.1.10
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Other
unspecified
urgent
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: Ales Musil
QA Contact: Michael Burman
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-08-21 13:12 UTC by SimonScott
Modified: 2020-09-02 05:29 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-09-01 15:23:35 UTC
oVirt Team: Network
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
supervdsm.log (299.65 KB, text/plain)
2020-08-24 22:51 UTC, SimonScott
no flags Details

Description SimonScott 2020-08-21 13:12:08 UTC
Description of problem: When adding a Tagged VLAN VM Network to a Hosts bonded interface it throws an error 'Error while executing action HostSetupNetworks: Unexpected exception' and fails.
The following event is seen in Events: 'VDSM ddmswiftovt03 command HostSetupNetworksVDS failed: Internal JSON-RPC error: {'reason': 'Unexpected failure of libnm when running the mainloop: run execution'}'


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible: 100%


Steps to Reproduce: (All actions via oVirt Manager)
1. Create bonded interface on host.
2. Create Network with 'Enable VLAN Tagging' and 'VM network' checkboxes selected.
3. Add new network to the new bonded interface 

Actual results:
Failed with 'Error while executing action HostSetupNetworks: Unexpected exception'


Expected results:
Success


Additional info:
This is successful in oVirt 4.3.9 and previous releases.
It is a fundamental requirement of virtualising Networks in a fully redundant virtualised environment, without this bug being resolved will mean our oVirt environment will not proceed with 4.4

Comment 1 SimonScott 2020-08-21 13:19:58 UTC
I should have mentioned that this affects only bonded interface as it is successful on individual interfaces. This however is of no benefit when a fully redundant environment is required.

Comment 2 SimonScott 2020-08-24 06:23:40 UTC
The Host OS is Centos 8.2

Comment 3 Dominik Holler 2020-08-24 08:10:49 UTC
Thanks for reporting the issue. Can you please share the supervdsm.log from the host during the time this issue occurred?

Comment 4 RHEL Program Management 2020-08-24 08:10:58 UTC
The documentation text flag should only be set after 'doc text' field is provided. Please provide the documentation text and set the flag to '?' again.

Comment 5 SimonScott 2020-08-24 22:51:51 UTC
Created attachment 1712449 [details]
supervdsm.log

supervdsm.log at time of failure

Comment 6 Ales Musil 2020-08-25 05:37:03 UTC
Hello,

this seems to be similar to the BZ#1860479 [0]. Are you configuring the affected bond over two Broadcom cards with bnxt driver? 

[0] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1860479

Comment 7 simonscott 2020-08-25 07:47:04 UTC
Hi Ales,

I cannot access the bug you referred to as it’s restricted. Perhaps you could provide details?

The details of the NIC and driver are as follows:

Ethernet controller: Broadcom Inc. and subsidiaries BCM57416 NetXtreme-E Dual-Media 10G RDMA Ethernet Controller

[root@ddmswiftovt03 vdsm]# ethtool -i eno2np1
driver: bnxt_en
version: 1.10.0
firmware-version: 214.0.253.1/pkg 21.40.25.31
expansion-rom-version:
bus-info: 0000:17:00.1
supports-statistics: yes
supports-test: yes
supports-eeprom-access: yes
supports-register-dump: no
supports-priv-flags: no
[root@ddmswiftovt03 vdsm]#

Comment 8 SimonScott 2020-08-26 13:33:22 UTC
Hi Ales,

So in answer to your question - Yes the bond is between 2 Broadcom cards with bnxt driver.

Comment 9 Dominik Holler 2020-08-26 14:51:05 UTC
Hi Simon,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860479
is now public again.
Can you please check if bug is similar or a duplicate of this one?

Comment 10 SimonScott 2020-09-01 15:11:10 UTC
Apologies for the delay Dominik, this appears to be similar in all respects to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860479

Comment 11 Dominik Holler 2020-09-01 15:23:35 UTC
Thanks for checking!

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1860479 ***


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