Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bug 2046181: baremetal: wait for image-customization to come up #5579

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 5, 2022

Conversation

dtantsur
Copy link
Member

It crashes if the provided network configuration is invalid. In this
case inspection currently fails with a generic message.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. label Jan 26, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 26, 2022

@dtantsur: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2046181, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.10.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.10.0)
  • bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Bugzilla (yporagpa@redhat.com), skipping review request.

In response to this:

Bug 2046181: baremetal: wait for image-customization to come up

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Jan 26, 2022
@dtantsur
Copy link
Member Author

/test e2e-metal-ipi

@derekhiggins
Copy link
Contributor

derekhiggins commented Jan 26, 2022

This is a fix worth making but I don't think addresses the bug, the end user will still get a ironic related error from the installer

level=debug msg=2022/01/26 15:19:02 [DEBUG] ironic_node_v1.openshift-master-host[0]: apply errored, but we're indicating that via the Error pointer rather than returning it: could not contact Ironic API: context deadline exceeded

@dtantsur
Copy link
Member Author

I guess we have a whole different story that the installer doesn't care if bootstrap fails. I don't think we can have a better fix though, not unless we rework how ironic is started.

if [ $attempt -eq 15 ]; then
echo The image-customization controller did not come up in 30 seconds
podman logs image-customization
exit 1
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This will just restart the script I think? https://github.com/openshift/installer/blob/master/data/data/bootstrap/baremetal/systemd/units/ironic.service#L12

We really need a way to stop installation.

Using https://github.com/openshift/installer/blob/master/docs/dev/bootstrap_services.md#bootstrap-service-records looks like it would really help for debugging, but I'm not clear on whether anything in the installer will actually bail out once a failure is recorded. @staebler what is the recommended way of bailing out from a non-recoverable error?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We can tell systemd to treat some exit codes as non-restartable RestartPreventExitStatus=42 and use exit 42 here. Will it work as a quick workaround?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There is no current way for the bootstrap machine to inform the installer that it should bail out of waiting for the installation to complete.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you! Then, I think, aborting this script is the most obvious thing we can do.

@@ -204,6 +204,19 @@ podman run -d --net host --privileged --name image-customization \
--secret pull-secret,mode=400 \
${CUSTOMIZATION_IMAGE}

# We're not interesting for the exit code, just that the server is available
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It would actually be sufficient to just check if the container has exited after a short interval (perhaps after the sleep 10 on line 233).

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are we sure 10 seconds are always enough? I guess it's not going to take too long...

@dtantsur dtantsur force-pushed the icc-start branch 2 times, most recently from d11ff03 to ba6effe Compare January 27, 2022 12:16
@dtantsur
Copy link
Member Author

/retest

@dtantsur
Copy link
Member Author

/test e2e-metal-ipi

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

The requirements for Bugzilla bugs have changed (BZs linked to PRs on master branch need to target OCP 4.11), recalculating validity.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jan 28, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 28, 2022

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2046181, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.11.0" release, but it targets "4.10.0" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

The requirements for Bugzilla bugs have changed (BZs linked to PRs on master branch need to target OCP 4.11), recalculating validity.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@dtantsur
Copy link
Member Author

/bugzilla refresh
/test e2e-alibaba

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jan 31, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 31, 2022

@dtantsur: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2046181, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.11.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.11.0)
  • bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Bugzilla (yporagpa@redhat.com), skipping review request.

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh
/test e2e-alibaba

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@elfosardo
Copy link
Contributor

e2e-alibaba is permanently failing, I think we should override it for the time being

@ardaguclu
Copy link
Member

Yes, e2e-alibaba is permanently failing.

/approve

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 31, 2022
@wking
Copy link
Member

wking commented Jan 31, 2022

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 31, 2022

@wking: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2046181, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.11.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.11.0)
  • bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Bugzilla (yporagpa@redhat.com), skipping review request.

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 3, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ardaguclu, elfosardo

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

It crashes if the provided network configuration is invalid. In this
case inspection currently fails with a generic message.
@bfournie
Copy link
Contributor

bfournie commented Feb 4, 2022

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 4, 2022
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

8 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 5, 2022

@dtantsur: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-alibaba ba6effe link false /test e2e-alibaba
ci/prow/e2e-metal-ipi-virtualmedia c7e8dd5 link false /test e2e-metal-ipi-virtualmedia

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 8be5e26 into openshift:master Feb 5, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 5, 2022

@dtantsur: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Bugzilla bug 2046181 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 2046181: baremetal: wait for image-customization to come up

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@zaneb zaneb added the platform/baremetal IPI bare metal hosts platform label Feb 10, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. platform/baremetal IPI bare metal hosts platform
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.