action #174547
closedEnsure wasserstoff+atomkraft are properly used or designated as unused size:S
0%
Description
Motivation¶
Based on #174265-12 wasserstoff+atomkraft might currently not be used by QE UV squad. Also our internal loan period expires on 2024-12-31. We should ensure that wasserstoff+atomkraft are properly used or designated as unused
Acceptance criteria¶
- AC1: racktables entries are up-to-date for wasserstoff+atomkraft
Suggestions¶
- Sync with UV squad about current use of machines
- Ensure racktables entries are up-to-date for wasserstoff+atomkraft
Files
Updated by okurz 2 months ago
- Copied from action #128498: ARM server for UV squad (was: Requesting a quote for two Ampere Altra Servers to be used for various testing efforts inside the department) size:M added
Updated by robert.richardson 11 days ago
- Status changed from Workable to In Progress
Updated by openqa_review 11 days ago
- Due date set to 2025-02-26
Setting due date based on mean cycle time of SUSE QE Tools
Updated by robert.richardson 11 days ago
- Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
I have talked to @pluskalm, who is listed as the contact for both machines. Although the UV Squad is currently not using them, they most likely have a use case for both machines.
So i am leaving the contact information in place for now and extending the loan period by 6 months.
Updated by livdywan 10 days ago
@robert.richardson Could you a ticket on the UV backlog with some notes on whatever you discussed? Otherwise the machines will probably be forgotten again 😉
Updated by robert.richardson 9 days ago
- Status changed from Workable to In Progress
Updated by robert.richardson 9 days ago · Edited
I'm talking to @opithart who is currently trying to set up the machines, though is running into issues when trying to boot SLES 15-SP6
Any ideas whats causing this issue ?
so far he tried:
- resetting the bios to default settings
- kernel parameter efi=debug but got no output
- kernel parameter efi=noruntime
- changing multiple secureboot parameters
okurz wrote in #note-10:
robert.richardson wrote in #note-9:
extending the loan period by 6 months.
and what will happen in 6 months then?
Thats why i asked in chat yesterday what the default procedure for this is, and if i should simply extend it by some months. I don't know.
livdywan wrote in #note-11:
@robert.richardson Could you a ticket on the UV backlog with some notes on whatever you discussed? Otherwise the machines will probably be forgotten again 😉
We havent really discussed anything other than what i've already wrote. I asked if UV is using the machines, he said no but they would/could, i said ok, updated racktables and provided the IPMI credentials.
I now asked if they already have a ticket regarding the machines (Edit: not yet) that i can link here for reference and additionally i can create a checkup ticket for us (i would do that here in progress) to once again check on the machines when the loan period ends.
Updated by robert.richardson 9 days ago
- Status changed from In Progress to Feedback
Updated by robert.richardson 9 days ago
We have decided against another "checkup" ticket in the daily, and that the loan period is likely to short, so i've increased it to 3 years for both machines in question.
Regarding the mentioned setup issues, @opithart was able to boot ubuntu and noticed that both SFP+ interfaces are down (one of them has the SFP+ transciever present).
As the UV squad has no direct access to FC, i offered we can help with that, although i asked him to create a seperate ticket for it.
Updated by opithart 8 days ago · Edited
I have just now created a subtask ticket #177264 like @robert.richardson asked me to.
Updated by robert.richardson 8 days ago · Edited
opithart wrote in #note-17:
I have just now created a subtask ticket #177264 like @robert.richardson asked me to.
Thanks, 'm assigning the new ticket to myself and resolving this one.
Updated by robert.richardson 8 days ago
- Status changed from Feedback to Resolved