Unable to retrieve PCI/Disk infos

[deviantony]

One of our customer reported that he was unable to get the PCI/Disk info in the host view of Portainer. These features are agent related.

He reported the following error in the host view when trying to access it:

http error: Unable to retrieve host information (err=Get https://pci-ids.ucw.cz/v2.2/pci.ids.gz: x509: certificate signed by unknown authority) (code=500)

I did a quick investigation on this:

We leverage the jaypipes/ghw library (https://github.com/jaypipes/ghw) to retrieve PCI info, this library relays on https://github.com/jaypipes/pcidb to retrieve PCI info, more details in:

• https://github.com/jaypipes/ghw#pci

It seems that the call to this URL https://pci-ids.ucw.cz/v2.2/pci.ids.gz was introduced with this PR: jaypipes/pcidb#2 around 3 weeks ago.

From what I understand of this PR, it will try to look for any PCI definitions on the filesystem first and if cannot find any definition, then will try to download these definitions from this URL.

I asked our customer to check if the /usr/share/misc/pci.ids file existed inside his environment and he confirmed the existence of this file:

Could this be because where searching for this file inside the container filesystem instead of the host? Should we leverage jaypipes/ghw#56 to fix this problem?

Ideally, avoiding any Internet related action would be better.

[deviantony]

Related issue: jaypipes/ghw#86

[deviantony]

The fix in #35 did not solve the problem for our customer.

With the recent introduction of dep (#26), which is pinning the ghw version to 0.1.0 I have the following result in the host view:

Using the latest version of the agent.

@chiptus can you try to reproduce using the latest agent codebase (dep powered) ? If you're able to reproduce, can you fix it? (could be a simple upgrade of the ghw dependency).

[deviantony]

@chiptus nevermind, fixed after pointing the ghw dependency at the following commit: jaypipes/ghw@34ad6ce

I locked it to this commit because it is the one just before the commit doing the upgrade to pcidb to 0.2.0 (introducing jaypipes/pcidb#2).

I still think that jaypipes/pcidb#2 is the cause of our customer problem and we need to investigate/fix this.

[deviantony]

I will provide a build for our customer based on 69d66ee to see if it solves their problem and will update the issue.