Bug 1874862
| Summary: | [RFE] Fence agent for IBM Power Systems Virtual Servers on IBM Cloud | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 | Reporter: | Chris Feist <cfeist> | |
| Component: | fence-agents | Assignee: | Oyvind Albrigtsen <oalbrigt> | |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Brandon Perkins <bperkins> | |
| Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | ||
| Priority: | medium | |||
| Version: | 8.3 | CC: | bperkins, bugproxy, cluster-maint, fdanapfe, lmiksik, mjuricek, mkelly, nwahl, oalbrigt, sbradley, slevine, toneata | |
| Target Milestone: | rc | Keywords: | FutureFeature, ZStream | |
| Target Release: | 8.5 | Flags: | pm-rhel:
mirror+
|
|
| Hardware: | ppc64le | |||
| OS: | Linux | |||
| Whiteboard: | ||||
| Fixed In Version: | fence-agents-4.2.1-85.el8 | Doc Type: | No Doc Update | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | ||
| Clone Of: | ||||
| : | 2042496 2060481 2060482 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2022-05-10 13:15:55 UTC | Type: | Feature Request | |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | ||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | ||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | ||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | ||
| Embargoed: | ||||
| Bug Depends On: | ||||
| Bug Blocks: | 1564587, 1908097, 2042496, 2060481, 2060482 | |||
|
Description
Chris Feist
2020-09-02 12:55:18 UTC
Assuming PowerVS == "Power Systems Virtual Server", this appears to be the API doc: - https://cloud.ibm.com/apidocs/power-cloud Not to be confused with the PowerVC offering: - https://www.ibm.com/us-en/marketplace/powervc See also the following RFE, which may overlap with this one. - BZ1728203 - RFE: RHEL HA support for IBM Cloud / IBM Bluemix (fence-agents) (RHEL8) Apparently BlueMix is not a sub-offering within IBM Cloud. Rather, BlueMix was re-branded to IBM Cloud: - https://www.ibm.com/cloud/bluemix?mhsrc=ibmsearch_a&mhq=bluemix%20now%20ibm%20cloud ------- Comment From PROBST.com 2020-09-21 15:45 EDT------- Dear Red Hat, can you please specify * the amount and size of LPARs in PowerVS required * minimum OS Levels * anything additional you need in PowerVS to start working? The start/stop/halt/reboot Cloud CLIs are publically available (https://cloud.ibm.com/apidocs/power-cloud#pcloud-pvminstances-action-post). The probing of status IBM still owes you. Cheers, Katharina ------- Comment From PROBST.com 2020-09-22 03:36 EDT------- Now how to probe the Instance status: https://cloud.ibm.com/apidocs/power-cloud#pcloud-pvminstances-get These are the possible status values: Active Error Shutoff please come back with details on the LPARs to get started. 3 nodes w/2GB RAM/20GB disk should be enough to get started. (In reply to Oyvind Albrigtsen from comment #5) > 3 nodes w/2GB RAM/20GB disk should be enough to get started. Thanks Oyvind. Regarding the 'minimum OS levels' I guess we will start the development on the current RHEL8 release, and when the development is finished IBM and Red Hat will have to decide for which other RHEL8 minor releases this should be supported. Correct? (In reply to Frank Danapfel from comment #6) > (In reply to Oyvind Albrigtsen from comment #5) > > 3 nodes w/2GB RAM/20GB disk should be enough to get started. > > Thanks Oyvind. > > Regarding the 'minimum OS levels' I guess we will start the development on > the current RHEL8 release, and when the development is finished IBM and Red > Hat will have to decide for which other RHEL8 minor releases this should be > supported. Correct? Correct. For development we just need RHEL8 nodes really, but for QE testing we'll need upgraded packages to ensure we test on the exact version we're going to release for. (In reply to IBM Bug Proxy from comment #2) > ------- Comment From PROBST.com 2020-09-21 15:45 EDT------- > Dear Red Hat, > > can you please specify > * the amount and size of LPARs in PowerVS required > * minimum OS Levels > * anything additional > you need in PowerVS to start working? > > The start/stop/halt/reboot Cloud CLIs are publically available > (https://cloud.ibm.com/apidocs/power-cloud#pcloud-pvminstances-action-post). > > The probing of status IBM still owes you. > > Cheers, > Katharina Hi Katharina, is the information provided by Oyvind, who is the Red Hat developer who is going to work on creating the fence agent, enough for IBM to start the preparation of the Power VS environment required for the developemnt and test of the fence agent? If yes, please let us know when the environment is available and how it can be acessed. Otherwise please tell us what other information is needed. ------- Comment From PROBST.com 2021-06-17 03:22 EDT------- The implementation is currently undergoing a QA asessment. Need to wait for the result. I ran into a dnf update issue on CS8, and when I asked about it on libera/#centos-stream, I was asked to share the issue on this bug. [root@sm-striker02 ~]# dnf update Anvil Enterprise Repository (centos-8-stream) 4.7 kB/s | 3.0 kB 00:00 Error: Problem 1: package fence-agents-ibm-powervs-4.2.1-84.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-84.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-84.el8.noarch - cannot install the best update candidate for package fence-agents-ibm-powervs-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch - cannot install the best update candidate for package fence-agents-common-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch Problem 2: cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-84.el8.noarch - package fence-agents-ibm-vpc-4.2.1-84.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-84.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package fence-agents-amt-ws-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common >= 4.2.1-85.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package fence-agents-ibm-vpc-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch - cannot install the best update candidate for package fence-agents-amt-ws-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch Problem 3: problem with installed package fence-agents-ibm-vpc-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch - package fence-agents-ibm-vpc-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-77.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package fence-agents-ibm-vpc-4.2.1-78.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-78.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package fence-agents-ibm-vpc-4.2.1-82.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-82.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package fence-agents-ibm-vpc-4.2.1-83.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-83.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package fence-agents-ibm-vpc-4.2.1-84.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-84.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch - cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-78.el8.noarch - cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-82.el8.noarch - cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-83.el8.noarch - cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-84.el8.noarch - package fence-agents-apc-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common >= 4.2.1-85.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package fence-agents-apc-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch Problem 4: problem with installed package fence-agents-ibm-powervs-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch - package fence-agents-ibm-powervs-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-77.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package fence-agents-ibm-powervs-4.2.1-78.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-78.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package fence-agents-ibm-powervs-4.2.1-82.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-82.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package fence-agents-ibm-powervs-4.2.1-83.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-83.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package fence-agents-ibm-powervs-4.2.1-84.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common = 4.2.1-84.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch - cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-78.el8.noarch - cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-82.el8.noarch - cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-83.el8.noarch - cannot install both fence-agents-common-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch and fence-agents-common-4.2.1-84.el8.noarch - package fence-agents-apc-snmp-4.2.1-85.el8.noarch requires fence-agents-common >= 4.2.1-85.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package fence-agents-apc-snmp-4.2.1-77.el8.noarch (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages or '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages) When I used '--allowerasing --nobest', it updated to -84- successfully. (In reply to Madison Kelly from comment #14) ... > > When I used '--allowerasing --nobest', it updated to -84- successfully. Thank you for your report. I'm looking into how to solve this. In the meanwhile you should be able to upgrade after running "yum remove fence-agents-ibm-vpc". It'll remove the -all subpackage, which you can reinstall after upgrading. ------- Comment From fnovak.com 2022-04-19 18:31 EDT------- Fixed In Version: fence-agents-4.2.1-85.el8 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 (fence-agents bug fix and enhancement update), 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-2022:1757 |