Description of problem: Description of problem: [RHOSP 16.1][Backport] Fix for PowerFlex/vxflex volume type conversion Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info:
Do you plan to backport the fix upstream to all relevant stable branches? Apart from the rename, the code of the fix seems to apply on the older version of the driver too.
Yes, as soon once this merges in master, will push the backports to stable branches
Vlad, can your team take upstream backport? Greg, my understanding is that even if upstream community may not accept it, as new functionality, that is what RH will use for backport to 16.1.
Yes if you can manage the backport patch we can include it downstream (z4). Is this new functionality already in 16.1 and we only need a fix or do we also need to backport the feature itself?
(In reply to Gregory Charot from comment #4) > Yes if you can manage the backport patch we can include it downstream (z4). > > Is this new functionality already in 16.1 and we only need a fix or do we > also need to backport the feature itself? This features should already be in 16.1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808570
(In reply to Luigi Toscano from comment #1) > Do you plan to backport the fix upstream to all relevant stable branches? > Apart from the rename, the code of the fix seems to apply on the older > version of the driver too. yes, as soon as the main review is ready we will open backport reviews
This still active work on upstream Master branch.
Why was that moved to z7? We are waiting for this fix to do re-cert powerflex with fix in z4 and this patch. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/723826 has already backported to Train already. Are you talking on adding https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/754785 also?
(In reply to arkady kanevsky from comment #9) > Why was that moved to z7? > We are waiting for this fix to do re-cert powerflex with fix in z4 and this > patch. > https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/723826 has already > backported to Train already. > > Are you talking on adding > https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/754785 also? This bug is about https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/754785/, which is not merged even in master yet.
Originally this BZ was about https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/723826 not about https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/754785/. Let, Sam Wan to comment if we need both for re-cert.
(In reply to arkady kanevsky from comment #11) > Originally this BZ was about > https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/723826 not about > https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/754785/. > > Let, Sam Wan to comment if we need both for re-cert. Can you please recheck? The only review ever mentioned here has been 754785 from the beginning and 723826 is not mentioned anywhere. Moreover, the subject of 754785 is "Fix PowerFlex volume type conversion", which matches the current title of this bug ("Fix for PowerFlex/vxflex volume type conversion").
You are correct it is https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/754785 only. Have been waiting for approval since March 16. We should of landed it in Wallaby. It is a simple fix.
https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/754785 finally landed upstream. Dell will backport it all the way to Train if upstream community will allow it. Hope we can land it in z6.
(In reply to arkady kanevsky from comment #14) > https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/754785 finally landed > upstream. > Dell will backport it all the way to Train if upstream community will allow > it. > Hope we can land it in z6. Arkady, it's marked for z7 as the time for z6 was around April 7th, and the stable/victoria and stable/train still in active work. This is the reason for being targeted for z7 on 2021-04-12. Regards,
Suggest we target this functionality to RHOSP-17 since volume retype is used for volume migration that is targeted for 17.0 Thus I suggest we target this BZ to 17 and close https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=195636.
(In reply to arkady kanevsky from comment #16) > Suggest we target this functionality to RHOSP-17 since volume retype is used > for volume migration that is targeted for 17.0 > Thus I suggest we target this BZ to 17 and close > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=195636. Arkady meant to say https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1956366 (the cloned BZ for 16.2). Pablo, do you agree with this and should we retarget this one in particular for OSP17?
(In reply to Ken Holtz from comment #17) > (In reply to arkady kanevsky from comment #16) > > Suggest we target this functionality to RHOSP-17 since volume retype is used > > for volume migration that is targeted for 17.0 > > Thus I suggest we target this BZ to 17 and close > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=195636. > > Arkady meant to say https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1956366 (the > cloned BZ for 16.2). Pablo, do you agree with this and should we retarget > this one in particular for OSP17? Yes, I full agree with moving this one to RHOSP 17.
Moving this to OSP 17 target as discussed. Please help clean up anything i did not set properly. The other BZ tracking OSP 16.2 target has been closed.
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 (Release of components for Red Hat OpenStack Platform 17.0 (Wallaby)), 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-2022:6543
The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 120 days