[ovirt-users] virtio-serial0 duplicate id
Arik Hadas
ahadas at redhat.com
Sun Feb 14 11:16:22 UTC 2016
----- Original Message -----
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > > On 11 Feb 2016, at 17:02, Johannes Tiefenbacher <jojo at linbit.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > finally I am posting something to this list :) I read it for quite some
> > > time now and I am an ovirt user since 3.0.
> >
> > Hi,
> > welcome:)
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > I updated an engine installation from 3.2 to 3.6 (stepwise of course, and
> > > yes I know that's pretty outdated ;-). Then I updated the associated
> > > Centos6 hosts vdsm as well, from 3.10.x to 3.16.30. I also set my cluster
> > > comp level to 3.5(3.6 comp level is only possible with El7 hosts if I
> > > understood correctly).
> > >
> > > After my first failover test a VM could not be restarted, altough the
> > > host
> > > where it was running could correctly be fenced.
> > >
> > > The reason according to engine's log was this:
> > >
> > > VM xxxxxxxx is down with error. Exit message: internal error process
> > > exited
> > > while connecting to monitor: qemu-kvm: -device
> > > virtio-serial-pci,id=virtio-serial0,max_ports=16,bus=pci.0,addr=0x4:
> > > Duplicate ID 'virtio-serial0' for device
> > >
> > >
> > > I then recognized that I am not able to run this VM on any host. Ich
> > > checked the virtual hardware in the engine database and could confirm
> > > that
> > > ALL my VMs had this problem: 2 devices with alias='virtio-serial0’
> >
> > it may very well be a bug, but it would be quite difficult to say unless it
> > is reproducible. It may be broken from earlier releases
> > Arik/Shmuel, maybe it rings a bell?
>
> In 3.6 we changed virtio-serial to be a managed device.
> The script named 03_06_0310_change_virtio_serial_to_managed_device.sql
> changes unmanaged virtio-serial devices (that were all unmanaged before) to
> be managed.
> A potential flow that will cause this duplication I can think of is:
> 1. Have a running VM in a pre-3.6 engine - it has unmanaged virtio-serial
> 2. Upgrade to 3.6 while the VM is running - the unmanaged virtio-serial
> becomes managed
> 3. Do something that will change the hash of the devices
> => the engine will add an additional unmanaged virtio-serial device
>
> Why didn't it happen before? because the handling of unmanaged devices was:
> 1. Upon change in the VM devices (their hash), ask for all the devices
> (full-list)
> 2. Remove all previous unmanaged devices
> 3. Add every device that does not exist in the database
> When we add an unmanaged device we generate a new ID (!) - therefore we had
> to remove all the previous unmanaged devices before adding the new ones.
> If the previous unmanaged virtio-serial became managed, it is not removed and
> we will end up having two virtio-serial devices.
>
> @Johannes - is it true that the VM was running before the engine got updated
> to 3.6 and wasn't powered-off since then?
>
> I managed to simulate this.
> We probably need to prevent the addition of unmanaged virtio-serial in 3.6
> engine but IMO we should also use the ID reported by VDSM instead of
> generating a new one to eliminate similar issues in the future.
> @Eli, Omer - can you recall why can't we use the ID we get from VDSM for the
> unmanaged devices?
> (we can continue this discussion in devel-list or in bugzilla..)
>
> >
> > >
> > > e.g.:
> > >
> > > ----
> > > engine=# SELECT * FROM vm_device WHERE vm_device.device = 'virtio-serial'
> > > AND vm_id = 'cbfa359f-d0b8-484b-8ec0-cf9b8e4bb3ec' ORDER BY vm_id;
> > > -[ RECORD 1
> > > ]-------------+-------------------------------------------------------------
> > > device_id | 2821d03c-ce88-4613-9095-e88eadcd3792
> > > vm_id | cbfa359f-d0b8-484b-8ec0-cf9b8e4bb3ec
> > > type | controller
> > > device | virtio-serial
> > > address |
> > > boot_order | 0
> > > spec_params | { }
> > > is_managed | t
> > > is_plugged | f
> > > is_readonly | f
> > > _create_date | 2016-01-14 08:30:43.797161+01
> > > _update_date | 2016-02-10 10:04:56.228724+01
> > > alias | virtio-serial0
> > > custom_properties | { }
> > > snapshot_id |
> > > logical_name |
> > > is_using_scsi_reservation | f
> > > -[ RECORD 2
> > > ]-------------+-------------------------------------------------------------
> > > device_id | 29e0805f-d836-451a-9ec3-9031baa995e6
> > > vm_id | cbfa359f-d0b8-484b-8ec0-cf9b8e4bb3ec
> > > type | controller
> > > device | virtio-serial
> > > address | {bus=0x00, domain=0x0000, type=pci,
> > > slot=0x04,
> > > function=0x0}
> > > boot_order | 0
> > > spec_params | { }
> > > is_managed | f
> > > is_plugged | t
> > > is_readonly | f
> > > _create_date | 2016-02-11 13:47:02.69992+01
> > > _update_date |
> > > alias | virtio-serial0
> > > custom_properties |
> > > snapshot_id |
> > > logical_name |
> > > is_using_scsi_reservation | f
> > >
> > > ----
> > >
> > > My solution was this:
> > >
> > > DELETE FROM vm_device WHERE vm_id='cbfa359f-d0b8-484b-8ec0-cf9b8e4bb3ec'
> > > AND vm_device.device = 'virtio-serial' AND address = '';
> > >
> > > (just renaming one of the aliases to virtio-serial1" did not help)
>
> I believe it is not the right solution, it is better to remove the unmanaged
> device
> 1. For consistency
> 2. We changed the virtio-serial device to be managed in order to prevent a
> problem with VM-pools where in some cases Windows OS detects an existing
> virtio-serial device as a new device (and therefore pops-up a dialog for
> searching for an appropriate driver). By having the virtio-serial device
> managed we preserve its address and eliminate this problem.
And then to restart the VM of course, otherwise it will be added again the next time the devices change..
>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Is this a known issue? Couldn't find anything so far.
> > >
> > > Should I also post this to the developer list? I am not subscribed there
> > > yet, wanted to check out here first.
>
> I think it would be best to track and have it documented in bugzilla.
> Please open a bug (https://bugzilla.redhat.com)
>
> > >
> > >
> > > thanks in advance and all the best
> > > Jojo @ LINBIT VIE
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Users mailing list
> > > Users at ovirt.org
> > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >
> >
More information about the Users
mailing list