Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 1878980

Summary: Manila volumes cannot be unmounted after NFS driver pod restart
Product: OpenShift Container Platform Reporter: Qin Ping <piqin>
Component: StorageAssignee: aos-storage-staff <aos-storage-staff>
Storage sub component: Storage QA Contact: Qin Ping <piqin>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA Docs Contact:
Severity: high    
Priority: unspecified CC: aos-bugs, gouthamr, jack.ottofaro, jsafrane, msamymos, tbarron, vimartin, wduan, wking
Version: 4.5   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: 4.5.z   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: 1867152 Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-09-30 12:48:40 UTC Type: ---
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: 1867152    
Bug Blocks:    

Comment 1 Jack Ottofaro 2020-09-15 15:51:25 UTC 
We're asking the following questions to evaluate whether or not this bug warrants blocking an upgrade edge from either the previous X.Y or X.Y.Z. The ultimate goal is to avoid delivering an update which introduces new risk or reduces cluster functionality in any way. Sample answers are provided to give more context and the UpgradeBlocker flag has been added to this bug. It will be removed if the assessment indicates that this should not block upgrade edges. The expectation is that the assignee answers these questions.

Who is impacted?  If we have to block upgrade edges based on this issue, which edges would need blocking?
  example: Customers upgrading from 4.y.Z to 4.y+1.z running on GCP with thousands of namespaces, approximately 5% of the subscribed fleet
  example: All customers upgrading from 4.y.z to 4.y+1.z fail approximately 10% of the time
What is the impact?  Is it serious enough to warrant blocking edges?
  example: Up to 2 minute disruption in edge routing
  example: Up to 90seconds of API downtime
  example: etcd loses quorum and you have to restore from backup
How involved is remediation (even moderately serious impacts might be acceptable if they are easy to mitigate)?
  example: Issue resolves itself after five minutes
  example: Admin uses oc to fix things
  example: Admin must SSH to hosts, restore from backups, or other non standard admin activities
Is this a regression (if all previous versions were also vulnerable, updating to the new, vulnerable version does not increase exposure)?
  example: No, it’s always been like this we just never noticed
  example: Yes, from 4.y.z to 4.y+1.z Or 4.y.z to 4.y.z+1
Comment 7 errata-xmlrpc 2020-09-30 12:48:40 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 (OpenShift Container Platform 4.5.11 optional CSI driver Operators bug fix 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-2020:3768
Comment 8 W. Trevor King 2021-04-05 17:47:42 UTC 
Removing UpgradeBlocker from this older bug, to remove it from the suspect queue described in [1].  If you feel like this bug still needs to be a suspect, please add keyword again.

[1]: https://github.com/openshift/enhancements/pull/475