Project

General

Profile

Actions

action #158742

closed

coordination #151822: [epic] Soft-fails mitigation

Revisit soft-failure bsc#1206132

Added by JERiveraMoya 9 months ago. Updated 4 months ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Target version:
-
Start date:
2024-04-10
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:

Description

Motivation

See parent epic.
https://openqa.suse.de/tests/13989736#step/iscsi_client/45 -> bsc#1206132

Acceptance criteria

AC1: Revisit soft-failure bsc#1206132

Actions #1

Updated by JERiveraMoya 9 months ago

  • Description updated (diff)
Actions #2

Updated by JERiveraMoya 9 months ago

  • Tags changed from qe-yam-apr-sprint to qe-yam-may-sprint
Actions #3

Updated by hjluo 8 months ago

  • Status changed from Workable to In Progress
  • Assignee set to hjluo
Actions #4

Updated by JERiveraMoya 8 months ago

  • Tags changed from qe-yam-may-sprint to qe-yam-jan-sprint
Actions #5

Updated by JERiveraMoya 8 months ago

  • Tags changed from qe-yam-jan-sprint to qe-yam-jun-sprint
Actions #6

Updated by JERiveraMoya 7 months ago

could you please update state here? thanks.

Actions #7

Updated by hjluo 7 months ago · Edited

  • Now run on 15sp3 without workaroudn apply_workaround_bsc1206132() it still failed with yast2 iscsi-client' didn't finish or exited with non-zero.
    Test died: 'yast2 iscsi-client ' didn't finish or exited with non-zero code
  • Now asking Lee Duncan if it is expected or not for that product. (sent mail and wait for his reply)
Actions #8

Updated by hjluo 7 months ago

Mail exchange:

Hi Lee,
We are now revisiting bugbsc#1206132
and found it still in sles15sp3 MU update builds. https://openqa.suse.de/tests/14654652
From https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206132#c22 I found that we do not push open-iscsi fix to sles15sp3.
So my question is if this is expected or not for sles15sp3? do we have any plan to push this fix to sles15sp3 to make it work for our Yast MU testing?

Thanks a lot.

Lee Duncan replied with:

Please re-open the bug and request a port for SLE-15-SP3. That should
be no problem.

Actions #9

Updated by hjluo 7 months ago

Actions #10

Updated by JERiveraMoya 7 months ago

  • Tags changed from qe-yam-jun-sprint to qe-yam-jul-sprint
Actions #11

Updated by hjluo 7 months ago

  • Now we're wait the dev for a port for SLE-15-SP3 which he agreed.
Actions #12

Updated by JERiveraMoya 7 months ago

  • Tags changed from qe-yam-jul-sprint to qe-yam-aug-sprint
  • Status changed from In Progress to Workable

hjluo wrote in #note-11:

  • Now we're wait the dev for a port for SLE-15-SP3 which he agreed.

For informative purpose, please, write in the last message of the bug that you are requesting a port and you have agreed offline with developers about it (it is confusing to use so many tools, so we need to be clear for anyone reading the bug).
I'm moving to August sprint to revisit and keep you assigned.

Actions #13

Updated by hjluo 5 months ago

  • Status changed from Workable to In Progress
Actions #14

Updated by hjluo 5 months ago

  • update the bug_120613 again for a SLE-15-SP3 port.
Actions #15

Updated by JERiveraMoya 5 months ago

  • Tags changed from qe-yam-aug-sprint to qe-yam-sep-sprint
  • Status changed from In Progress to Workable
Actions #16

Updated by JERiveraMoya 4 months ago

  • Assignee deleted (hjluo)

We missed the notification, so I'm starting to think if really makes sense to keep the assignee on this kind of tickets, perhaps anyone could have picked it from our backlog if they are available.
Unfortunately I cannot monitor everything so I delegate this to squad members. Feel free to suggest better approach to avoid this in retro or any time. Perhaps was just something sporadic product of vacation period, I could guess so, we can see in the future (my original idea is not to assign ticket in workable in general, except exception like tickets that have been agreed with someone by some communication, but some of the squad members wanted to have them assigned to keep track).
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206132#c52
There is not point to push a bit developers for changes in bugs if we miss the fixes.

Unassigning for now, but feel free to pick the ticket again, there is not problem (as I said I also missed the notification in bugzilla, it can happens).

Actions #17

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago · Edited

Actions #18

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago

  • Assignee set to hjluo
Actions #19

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago · Edited

  • Status changed from Workable to In Progress
This is an autogenerated message for IBS integration:
This bug (1206132) was mentioned in
https://build.suse.de/request/show/344271 SLE-15-SP3 / open-iscsi
Actions #20

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago · Edited

  • Tried with Build20240909-1 and still failed, maybe the patch build is still not in.

    • current: install open-iscsi-2.1.7-150300.32.24.1.x86_64: success
    • the new build is:150300.32.30.1
Actions #22

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago · Edited

Actions #23

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago

Actions #24

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago

Actions #25

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
Actions #26

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago

  • Status changed from Resolved to In Progress
Actions #27

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago

Actions #28

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago

Actions #29

Updated by JERiveraMoya 4 months ago

  • Tags changed from qe-yam-sep-sprint to qe-yam-oct-sprint
  • Status changed from In Progress to New

Discussed with Heiko who raised again the request for a release request in Slack:
https://suse.slack.com/archives/C02CCRM8946/p1727098070773709

Actions #30

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago

Actions #31

Updated by hjluo 4 months ago

  • Status changed from New to In Progress
Actions #33

Updated by JERiveraMoya 4 months ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF