Bug 1961942: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name #235

sp98 · 2021-05-17T05:44:38Z

If the device provided in the devicePaths list in the localVolume CR has /dev/disk/by-id, then use the id name to create symlink in /mnt/local-storage/<storageClassName> directory.

Signed-off-by: Santosh Pillai sapillai@redhat.com
(cherry picked from commit 7b64dc2)

Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1955862

Tests:

Localvolume CR

  storageClassDevices:
    - storageClassName: "test"
      volumeMode: Filesystem
      fsType: ext4
      devicePaths:
        - /dev/sdb
        - /dev/sdc
        - /dev/sdd

/dev/sdd has no diskID, where as , /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc have diskID in /dev/disk/by-id

$ ls -lR /dev/disk

/dev/disk/by-id:
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root  9 May 17 06:54 ata-VBOX_CD-ROM_VB0-1a2b3c4d__ -> ../../sr0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root  9 May 17 06:55 ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VB3ec86ebf-ed3a5a93 -> ../../sdb
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root  9 May 17 06:54 ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VBc80535a7-0f341983 -> ../../sda
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 May 17 06:54 ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VBc80535a7-0f341983-part1 -> ../../sda1
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root  9 May 17 06:59 ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VBd77b4088-cdd82838 -> ../../sd

Observe that /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc symlinks are created via their /dev/disk/by-id and with the same name.
Where as /dev/sdd symlink is created with name sdd

$ ls /mnt/local-storage/test/
ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VB3ec86ebf-ed3a5a93  ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VBd77b4088-cdd82838  sdd
$

$ ls -lR /mnt/local-storage/test/
/mnt/local-storage/test/:
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 57 May 17 07:03 ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VB3ec86ebf-ed3a5a93 -> /dev/disk/by-id/ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VB3ec86ebf-ed3a5a93
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 57 May 17 07:03 ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VBd77b4088-cdd82838 -> /dev/disk/by-id/ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VBd77b4088-cdd82838
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root  8 May 17 07:03 sdd -> /dev/sdd
$

Upgrade Tests

Before upgrade:

have following disks
/sdb -- has disk/id -- ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VB3ec86ebf-ed3a5a93
/sdc -- no dev disk by id
localvolume CR:

  storageClassDevices:
    - storageClassName: "test"
      volumeMode: Filesystem
      fsType: ext4
      devicePaths:
        - /dev/sdb
        - /dev/sdc
        #- /dev/sdd

Symlinks created:

$ cd /mnt/local-storage/test/
$ ls
sdb  sdc

PVs created:

Every 2.0s: oc get pv                                                  localhost.localdomain: Wed May 19 11:01:48 2021

NAME                CAPACITY   ACCESS MODES   RECLAIM POLICY   STATUS      CLAIM   STORAGECLASS   REASON   AGE
local-pv-a36f27f9   8Gi        RWO            Delete           Available           test                    11m
local-pv-d00d358a   10Gi       RWO            Delete           Available           test                    11m

After upgrading:

added a new disk(sdd) with /dev/disk/by-id
added the disk in the local volume CR and applied it.

    storageClassDevices:
    - storageClassName: "test"
      volumeMode: Filesystem
      fsType: ext4
      devicePaths:
        - /dev/sdb
        - /dev/sdc
        - /dev/sdd

Only one new symlink was created for /dev/sdd. This symlink was based on ID. New symlinks were not created for /sda and /sdc

$ ls /mnt/local-storage/test/
ata-VBOX_HARDDISK_____VB6c3ba355-dac989e6  sdb	sdc
$

One new PV was created:

Every 2.0s: oc get pv                                                  localhost.localdomain: Wed May 19 11:05:23 2021

NAME                CAPACITY   ACCESS MODES   RECLAIM POLICY   STATUS      CLAIM   STORAGECLASS   REASON   AGE
local-pv-a36f27f9   8Gi        RWO            Delete           Available           test                    15m
local-pv-d00d358a   10Gi       RWO            Delete           Available           test                    15m
local-pv-dad1b103   10Gi       RWO            Delete           Available           test                    2m1s

Signed-off-by: Santosh Pillai <sapillai@redhat.com> (cherry picked from commit 7b64dc2)

openshift-ci · 2021-05-17T05:44:39Z

@sp98: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request.
To reference a bug, add 'Bug XXX:' to the title of this pull request and request another bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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 · 2021-05-17T05:45:14Z

@sp98: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request.
To reference a bug, add 'Bug XXX:' to the title of this pull request and request another bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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 · 2021-05-17T05:45:52Z

@sp98: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request.
To reference a bug, add 'Bug XXX:' to the title of this pull request and request another bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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 · 2021-05-17T05:46:14Z

@sp98: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request.
To reference a bug, add 'Bug XXX:' to the title of this pull request and request another bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

[WIP]use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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 · 2021-05-17T07:10:29Z

@sp98: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request.
To reference a bug, add 'Bug XXX:' to the title of this pull request and request another bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

[WIP]use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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 · 2021-05-17T07:11:20Z

@sp98: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request.
To reference a bug, add 'Bug XXX:' to the title of this pull request and request another bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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 · 2021-05-17T07:13:25Z

@sp98: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1955862, which is invalid:

expected the bug to target the "4.6.z" release, but it targets "---" instead
expected Bugzilla bug 1955862 to depend on a bug targeting a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z and in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but no dependents were found

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:

Bug 1955862: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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.

jsafrane · 2021-05-17T11:14:05Z

pkg/diskmaker/diskmaker.go

+		symLinkSource = deviceNameLocation.diskID
+		symLinkTarget = getSymlinkTarget(deviceNameLocation.diskID, symLinkDirPath)


What happens when someone updates to a new LSO version with symlinks already present from the old LSO? Looking at the code, does it create new symlinks, ignoring the old ones? What happens to already existing PVs?

I don't think new symlinks will be created. Old ones will still be used. We are checking for existing symlinks in line 155 below.

I've tested this scenario. Updated the results in the PR description. Looks good.

jsafrane · 2021-05-18T08:10:01Z

/lgtm

However, you need to sort out the Bugzilla bureaucracy:

Is there a corresponding 4.7 BZ? If so, make BZ 1955862 depend on it + set target release of 1955862 to 4.6.z.
If there is no 4.7 BZ, then it becomes tedious:
- Set target release of 1955862 to 4.8 & mark it ON_QA (the bug is already fixed there, right?). QA will mark it VERIFIED.
- Clone 1955862 and set target-release of the clone to 4.7.z & mark it ON_QA (it's already fixed there too). QA will mark it VERIFIED.
- Clone the clone (!) and set target-release of the cloned clone to 4.6.z & update this PR title to this BZ.

All this BZ dance makes sure we don't introduce regression along the upgrade path.

openshift-ci · 2021-05-18T08:10:21Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jsafrane, sp98

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:

~~OWNERS~~ [jsafrane]

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

openshift-bot · 2021-05-19T01:00:59Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2021-05-19T01:01:02Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1955862, which is invalid:

expected the bug to target the "4.6.z" release, but it targets "---" instead
expected Bugzilla bug 1955862 to depend on a bug targeting a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z and in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but no dependents were found

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

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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 · 2021-05-19T05:36:23Z

@sp98: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1955862, which is invalid:

expected the bug to target the "4.6.z" release, but it targets "---" instead
expected Bugzilla bug 1955862 to depend on a bug targeting a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z and in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but no dependents were found

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:

Bug 1955862: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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 · 2021-05-19T05:37:16Z

@sp98: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1955862, which is invalid:

expected the bug to target the "4.6.z" release, but it targets "---" instead
expected Bugzilla bug 1955862 to depend on a bug targeting a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z and in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but no dependents were found

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:

Bug 1955862: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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.

sp98 · 2021-05-19T05:38:30Z

/lgtm

However, you need to sort out the Bugzilla bureaucracy:

Is there a corresponding 4.7 BZ? If so, make BZ 1955862 depend on it + set target release of 1955862 to 4.6.z.

If there is no 4.7 BZ, then it becomes tedious:

There is no 4.7 BZ

openshift-ci · 2021-05-19T05:40:02Z

@sp98: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1955862, which is invalid:

expected the bug to target the "4.6.z" release, but it targets "---" instead
expected Bugzilla bug 1955862 to depend on a bug targeting a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z and in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but no dependents were found

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:

Bug 1955862: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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 · 2021-05-19T06:42:05Z

@sp98: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1961942, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1961941 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is NEW instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to target a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z, but it targets "4.8.0" 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:

Bug 1961942: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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.

sp98 · 2021-05-19T06:46:04Z

Set target release of 1955862 to 4.8 & mark it ON_QA (the bug is already fixed there, right?). QA will mark it VERIFIED.

done

Clone 1955862 and set target-release of the clone to 4.7.z & mark it ON_QA (it's already fixed there too). QA will mark it VERIFIED.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1961941

Clone the clone (!) and set target-release of the cloned clone to 4.6.z & update this PR title to this BZ.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1961942

All this BZ dance makes sure we don't introduce regression along the upgrade path.

openshift-bot · 2021-05-20T01:00:34Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2021-05-20T01:00:39Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1961942, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1961941 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to target a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z, but it targets "4.8.0" 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

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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-bot · 2021-05-21T01:01:12Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2021-05-21T01:01:18Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1961942, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1961941 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to target a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z, but it targets "4.8.0" 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

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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-bot · 2021-05-22T01:00:32Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2021-05-22T01:00:37Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1961942, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1961941 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to target a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z, but it targets "4.8.0" 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

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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-bot · 2021-05-23T01:00:38Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2021-05-23T01:00:43Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1961942, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1961941 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to target a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z, but it targets "4.8.0" 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

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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-bot · 2021-05-24T01:00:40Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2021-05-24T01:00:45Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1961942, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1961941 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to target a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z, but it targets "4.8.0" 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

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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-bot · 2021-05-25T01:00:45Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2021-05-25T01:00:50Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1961942, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to target a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z, but it targets "4.8.0" 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

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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.

jsafrane · 2021-05-25T09:13:32Z

/bugzilla refresh

openshift-ci · 2021-05-25T09:13:38Z

@jsafrane: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1961942, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1955862 to target a release in 4.7.0, 4.7.z, but it targets "4.8.0" 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

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.

jsafrane · 2021-05-25T09:14:58Z

/bugzilla refresh

openshift-ci · 2021-05-25T09:15:06Z

@jsafrane: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1961942, which is valid.

6 validation(s) were run on this bug

bug is open, matching expected state (open)
bug target release (4.6.z) matches configured target release for branch (4.6.z)
bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)
dependent bug Bugzilla bug 1961941 is in the state VERIFIED, which is one of the valid states (VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE))
dependent Bugzilla bug 1961941 targets the "4.7.z" release, which is one of the valid target releases: 4.7.0, 4.7.z
bug has dependents

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @chao007

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 · 2021-05-26T18:07:31Z

@sp98: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

openshift/local-storage-operator#235

Bugzilla bug 1961942 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1961942: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

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.

humblec · 2021-05-27T13:26:58Z

@sp98 does this have any side effects on detecting the same device after node reboot? considering the sd* names could change and the disks are not identified by the ID, there could be an issue after reboot and other device named as sdd in this case. Isnt it ?

use /disk/by-id name as symlink name

61bbad9

Signed-off-by: Santosh Pillai <sapillai@redhat.com> (cherry picked from commit 7b64dc2)

openshift-ci bot requested review from gnufied and huffmanca May 17, 2021 05:44

sp98 changed the title ~~use /disk/by-id name as symlink name~~ [WIP]use /disk/by-id name as symlink name May 17, 2021

openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 17, 2021

sp98 changed the title ~~[WIP]use /disk/by-id name as symlink name~~ use /disk/by-id name as symlink name May 17, 2021

openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 17, 2021

sp98 changed the title ~~use /disk/by-id name as symlink name~~ Bug 1955862: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name May 17, 2021

openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels May 17, 2021

jsafrane reviewed May 17, 2021

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci bot assigned jsafrane May 18, 2021

openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 18, 2021

openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 18, 2021

sp98 changed the title ~~Bug 1955862: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name~~ Bug 1961942: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name May 19, 2021

openshift-ci bot removed the bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. label May 25, 2021

openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/severity-urgent Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is urgent for the branch this PR is targeting. label May 25, 2021

openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label May 25, 2021

openshift-ci bot removed the bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label May 25, 2021

openshift-ci bot requested a review from chao007 May 25, 2021 09:15

sdodson added the cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. label May 26, 2021

openshift-merge-robot merged commit fa3468d into openshift:release-4.6 May 26, 2021

		symLinkSource = deviceNameLocation.diskID
		symLinkTarget = getSymlinkTarget(deviceNameLocation.diskID, symLinkDirPath)

Bug 1961942: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name #235

Bug 1961942: use /disk/by-id name as symlink name #235

Conversation

sp98 commented May 17, 2021 • edited

openshift-ci bot commented May 17, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 17, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 17, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 17, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 17, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 17, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 17, 2021

jsafrane May 17, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sp98 May 17, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sp98 May 19, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jsafrane commented May 18, 2021 • edited

openshift-ci bot commented May 18, 2021

openshift-bot commented May 19, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 19, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 19, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 19, 2021

sp98 commented May 19, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 19, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 19, 2021

sp98 commented May 19, 2021

openshift-bot commented May 20, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 20, 2021

openshift-bot commented May 21, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 21, 2021

openshift-bot commented May 22, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 22, 2021

openshift-bot commented May 23, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 23, 2021

openshift-bot commented May 24, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 24, 2021

openshift-bot commented May 25, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 25, 2021

jsafrane commented May 25, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 25, 2021

jsafrane commented May 25, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 25, 2021

openshift-ci bot commented May 26, 2021

humblec commented May 27, 2021

sp98 commented May 17, 2021 •

edited

jsafrane commented May 18, 2021 •

edited