Bug 512195 - [LTC 5.5 FEAT] Reipl support [201719]
Summary: [LTC 5.5 FEAT] Reipl support [201719]
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
Classification: Red Hat
Component: anaconda
Version: 5.5
Hardware: All
OS: All
high
high
Target Milestone: beta
: 5.5
Assignee: David Cantrell
QA Contact: Alexander Todorov
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 481160 531114 533487 533941 557291
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2009-07-16 16:40 UTC by IBM Bug Proxy
Modified: 2010-03-30 08:00 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

Fixed In Version: anaconda-11.1.2.200-1
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 533487 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-03-30 08:00:54 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
reIPL support (16.93 KB, text/plain)
2009-09-18 14:31 UTC, IBM Bug Proxy
no flags Details
anaconda-11.1.2.195-reipl.patch (20.83 KB, text/plain)
2009-10-03 01:28 UTC, David Cantrell
no flags Details
proposed fix (16.62 KB, text/plain)
2009-10-19 20:10 UTC, IBM Bug Proxy
no flags Details
latest reIPL patch (8.15 KB, text/plain)
2009-11-03 22:50 UTC, IBM Bug Proxy
no flags Details
reIPL-support-for-s390 (16.60 KB, patch)
2009-12-21 13:10 UTC, Steffen Maier
no flags Details | Diff
bring reIPL support up to HEAD (7.38 KB, patch)
2009-12-21 13:19 UTC, Steffen Maier
maier: review? (hamzy)
Details | Diff


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
IBM Linux Technology Center 54841 0 None None None Never
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2010:0194 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE anaconda bug fix and enhancement update 2010-03-29 12:24:02 UTC

Description IBM Bug Proxy 2009-07-16 16:40:58 UTC
=Comment: #0=================================================
Emily J. Ratliff <ratliff.com> - 
1. Feature Overview:
Feature Id:	[201719]
a. Name of Feature:	Reipl support
b. Feature Description
The Linux kernel already has support for a feature called Reipl.  We want to enable the installer to
use Reipl.  What Reipl does is instruct the 390 where to boot next.  This is different than a boot
loader since the 390 does not support a default boot location.
 
 Also, this tool can be used by a system administrator during other times.  If they want to shutdown
the machine and reboot from a different partition.
 
 There are documentation hits on this as well.
 
 Versions of hardware/software:
 - LPAR on machine older than z9
 - LPAR on z9 or newer (required to reipl from FCP)
 - z/VM 5.2 or older
 - z/VM 5.4 or later (required to reipl from FCP)

Additional Comments:	There are documentation hits on this as well.

This support has been incorporated into Fedora.

2. Feature Details:
Sponsor:	LTC
Architectures:
s390 native
s390 compat
s390x

Arch Specificity: Purely Arch Specific Code
Affects Installer: Yes
Delivery Mechanism: Backport
Category:	Installation
Request Type:	Installer - Enhancement from IBM
d. Upstream Acceptance:	Accepted
Sponsor Priority	2
f. Severity: Medium
IBM Confidential:	no
Code Contribution:	IBM code
g. Component Version Target:	The reipl code is included in the Linux mainline kernel and the distro
kernels that this feature has been targeted for.
 The installer does not have an associated upstream project, so IBM will provide code directly.

3. Business Case
Avoid customer frustration on installation by rebooting automatically instead of manually between
install phase 1 and 2.

4. Primary contact at Red Hat: 
John Jarvis
jjarvis

5. Primary contacts at Partner:
Project Management Contact:
Stephanie Glass, sglass.com, 512-838-9284

Technical contact(s):
Mark Hamzy, hamzy.com

IBM Manager:
Jeffrey Heroux, heroux.com

Comment 1 IBM Bug Proxy 2009-09-08 22:00:37 UTC
------- Comment From hamzy.com 2009-09-08 17:51 EDT-------
Take a look at 50289

Comment 2 IBM Bug Proxy 2009-09-18 14:31:29 UTC
Created attachment 361671 [details]
reIPL support


------- Comment (attachment only) From hamzy.com 2009-09-18 10:25 EDT-------

Comment 3 David Cantrell 2009-10-03 01:28:39 UTC
Created attachment 363541 [details]
anaconda-11.1.2.195-reipl.patch

Comments to the reIPL patch.

Comment 4 IBM Bug Proxy 2009-10-19 20:10:58 UTC
Created attachment 365273 [details]
proposed fix


------- Comment on attachment From hamzy.com 2009-10-19 16:02 EDT-------


I changed the debug text translation, removed the commented out code (which I left in to help future developers), and changed the tab to spaces.

About your statement on try/catch.  In general, I agree.  However, writeReipleMethod is designed to catch any exception from a python call and raise an error message string exception.  The method reIPLonCCW will call python functions and writeReiplMethod in a series of steps.  Any exception thrown will be caught and that will stop the execution and return two thing to the UI (an error message and instructions on what to do next).  The method reIPLonFCP works the same way.

Is this good enough to avoid your general restrictions on try/catch?

Comment 5 John Jarvis 2009-10-26 13:26:23 UTC
IBM is signed up to test and provide feedback.

Comment 6 Denise Dumas 2009-11-03 21:56:59 UTC
David says patch looks good.

Comment 7 IBM Bug Proxy 2009-11-03 22:50:58 UTC
Created attachment 367371 [details]
latest reIPL patch


------- Comment on attachment From hamzy.com 2009-11-03 17:43 EDT-------


This was the patch I sent to David for review yesterday.  Hopefully, this is what he is refering to. ^_^

Comment 8 John Jarvis 2009-11-04 13:37:58 UTC
IBM is signed up to test and provide feedback.

Comment 9 Denise Dumas 2009-11-12 16:33:49 UTC
Please realize that the dev-ack for this bz applies specifically to the patch in comment 7.  If there are other work items related to the business feature that reipl implies, or additional requirements come from this business use case, those will be considered for a future RHEL5 release since resources are so limited.

Comment 11 John Jarvis 2009-11-12 17:03:43 UTC
This enhancement request was evaluated by the full Red Hat Enterprise Linux 
team for inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux minor release.   As a 
result of this evaluation, Red Hat has tentatively approved inclusion of 
this feature in the next Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update minor release.   
While it is a goal to include this enhancement in the next minor release 
of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, the enhancement is not yet committed for 
inclusion in the next minor release pending the next phase of actual 
code integration and successful Red Hat and partner testing.

Comment 12 David Cantrell 2009-12-21 01:36:52 UTC
This bug was assigned to 4Suite, so I was missing it in my BZ queries.  The patch in comment #7 does not apply to rhel5-branch, it looks like it's for master or rhel6-branch.  Is this patch intended for RHEL 5.5?

Comment 13 Steffen Maier 2009-12-21 13:10:15 UTC
Created attachment 379613 [details]
reIPL-support-for-s390

This is the main part of the feature code for RHEL 5.5 from comment 4 including David's review comments. Among other things, in iutil.py it just appends new functions at the end. Because of the more recent 192ec32f30651dcc036b18e261dedcab7cb81283, this one hunk did not apply any more. I resolved this. Even though I haven't tested this, the change is obvious and does not imply any functional difference so I guess it's good.
Mark, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Comment 14 Steffen Maier 2009-12-21 13:19:13 UTC
Created attachment 379616 [details]
bring reIPL support up to HEAD

I don't know what Mark and David have discussed regarding the attachment 367371 [details] from comment 7. To me it seems as if this should go on top of the main feature code in attachment 379613 [details]. The patch seems to bring the RHEL5 reipl code more in line with what we have upstream since f3d9882a64394c35c7d9e3de1b1ace265b794fcd. From what I know, the code of attachment 379613 [details] was tested and did work, so I'm not sure if we need really all of the upstream parts as back-port. Anyway, as David pointed out it does not apply on rhel5-branch. I reworked this to apply to rhel5-branch after attachment 379613 [details] has already been applied.
*This is untested.*

Mark, can you please state what to do with this second patch?

Comment 15 David Cantrell 2009-12-22 02:51:37 UTC
The latest patch is not really that great in terms of implementation.  The anaconda team feels the reIPL code still needs some work upstream before a backport to RHEL-5 can be made.  The nested try/except blocks that catch Exception and then raise another Exception absolutely must go.

Given where we are in the schedule, I'd like this one to either go to 5.6 or just go entirely.  The reIPL patch needs a fair amount of work upstream to shed some weight and then test to make sure it works.

Comment 16 IBM Bug Proxy 2010-01-12 13:51:35 UTC
------- Comment From sglass.com 2010-01-12 08:44 EDT-------
IBM will accept the rejection of this feature.  Quitting feature at this time.

Comment 18 Chris Ward 2010-02-11 10:34:20 UTC
~~ Attention Customers and Partners - RHEL 5.5 Beta is now available on RHN ~~

RHEL 5.5 Beta has been released! There should be a fix present in this 
release that addresses your request. Please test and report back results 
here, by March 3rd 2010 (2010-03-03) or sooner.

Upon successful verification of this request, post your results and update 
the Verified field in Bugzilla with the appropriate value.

If you encounter any issues while testing, please describe them and set 
this bug into NEED_INFO. If you encounter new defects or have additional 
patch(es) to request for inclusion, please clone this bug per each request
and escalate through your support representative.

Comment 21 IBM Bug Proxy 2010-02-18 20:41:38 UTC
------- Comment From hamzy.com 2010-02-18 15:36 EDT-------
I tested DASD and SCSI on our 390 machine (T). With custom partitioning and default partitioning.

Comment 22 Alexander Todorov 2010-02-22 18:21:26 UTC
(In reply to comment #21)
> ------- Comment From hamzy.com 2010-02-18 15:36 EDT-------
> I tested DASD and SCSI on our 390 machine (T). With custom partitioning and
> default partitioning.    

Does this mean PASS?

Comment 23 IBM Bug Proxy 2010-02-22 21:01:19 UTC
------- Comment From sglass.com 2010-02-22 15:50 EDT-------
Yes, it passed.

Comment 26 errata-xmlrpc 2010-03-30 08:00:54 UTC
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2010-0194.html


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