Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
  1. Jul 26, 2012
    • Iustin Pop's avatar
      Fix issue in LUClusterVerifyGroup with multi-group clusters · 350506c6
      Iustin Pop authored
      
      In case LUClusterVerifyGroup is run on a group which doesn't contain
      the master node, the following could happen:
      
      - master node is selected due to the explicit check
      - if the order of nodes in the 'absent_nodes' list is such that the
        master node is the first in it, then we'll select (again) the master
        node
      - passing duplicate nodes to RPC calls will break due to RPC
        internals; this should be fixed separately, but in the meantime we
        just refrain from passing such duplicates
      
      This patch should not change the semantics of the code, since it
      wasn't guaranteed even before that we find a vm_capable node.
      
      Signed-off-by: default avatarIustin Pop <iustin@google.com>
      Reviewed-by: default avatarBernardo Dal Seno <bdalseno@google.com>
      350506c6
    • Iustin Pop's avatar
      Fix node group modification of node parameters · 4bf27dab
      Iustin Pop authored
      
      Commit 904b3bfe tried to fix the deletion of custom ndparams from
      group, but instead broke both modification and deletion: because we
      run ForceDictType on self.op.ndparams instead of the updated
      new_ndparams, we can neither delete nor set properly spindle_count
      (since it won't be coerced to int).
      
      Signed-off-by: default avatarIustin Pop <iustin@google.com>
      Reviewed-by: default avatarGuido Trotter <ultrotter@google.com>
      4bf27dab
  2. Jul 24, 2012
    • Iustin Pop's avatar
      Fix boot=on flag for CDROMs · 24be50e0
      Iustin Pop authored
      
      This generalises commit 4304964a to cdroms too, since they have
      somewhat the same logic. We just abstract the needs_boot_flag into a
      separate variable, and then reuse it in the cdrom section.
      
      Note that the logic of what 'if=' type to pass to KVM was very
      convoluted, and (I think) incorrect; I went and cleaned it to be more
      consistent.
      
      Signed-off-by: default avatarIustin Pop <iustin@google.com>
      Reviewed-by: default avatarGuido Trotter <ultrotter@google.com>
      24be50e0
    • Iustin Pop's avatar
      KVM: only pass boot flag once · 2b846304
      Iustin Pop authored
      
      This addresses issue 230: passing two methods of booting to KVM can,
      depending on the KVM version, confuse it.
      
      Note that commit 4304964a introduced a partial fix for this (but only
      for disks, and keyed on KVM versions). However, it didn't fix cdrom
      booting, which still fails with the same error, so let's fix it more
      generically; we still leave the per-disk check since that is about
      -boot c versus -drive …,boot=on rather than two boot methods.
      
      Patch is based on the one submitted by Vladimir Mencl, many thanks!
      
      Signed-off-by: default avatarIustin Pop <iustin@google.com>
      Reviewed-by: default avatarGuido Trotter <ultrotter@google.com>
      2b846304
  3. Jul 19, 2012
  4. Jul 18, 2012
  5. Jul 17, 2012
  6. Jul 13, 2012
  7. Jul 11, 2012
  8. Jul 07, 2012
  9. Jul 06, 2012
  10. Jul 05, 2012
  11. Jun 29, 2012
  12. Jun 28, 2012
  13. Jun 27, 2012
  14. Jun 20, 2012
    • Iustin Pop's avatar
      Fix bug in instance net changes · 80b898f9
      Iustin Pop authored
      
      _PrepareNicModification returns the invalid type, which triggers an
      assert resulting in a mysterious error:
      
      Failure: command execution error:
      
      Without any explanation. We fix this by removing the return value from
      _PrepareNicModification, and instead returning the expected type
      (since it differs per create/modification) from the (existing)
      wrappers for this function. We don't need to return actual changes
      from this function as _ApplyNicMods is the function that
      computes/returns the formatted changes.
      
      Signed-off-by: default avatarIustin Pop <iustin@google.com>
      Signed-off-by: default avatarRené Nussbaumer <rn@google.com>
      Reviewed-by: default avatarMichael Hanselmann <hansmi@google.com>
      80b898f9
  15. Jun 19, 2012
  16. Jun 18, 2012
  17. Jun 15, 2012
  18. Jun 14, 2012
  19. Jun 12, 2012
  20. Jun 11, 2012
  21. Jun 08, 2012
  22. Jun 01, 2012
    • Iustin Pop's avatar
      Fix a type issue and bad logic in cluster verification · e375fb61
      Iustin Pop authored
      
      Commit 2e04d454 introduced the new offline state for the instance
      state, but being a big monolithic patch it sneaked in something that
      doesn't make sense.
      
      The checks for extra instances (either wrongly up or just unknown) are
      done purely on a name-basis, not on objects, so the types there are
      wrong. Furthermore, they have no relation to the admin state of the
      instance, so we just drop the entire if block. We keep the increment
      of the offline instance count, but move it to a different loop over
      instances.
      
      Signed-off-by: default avatarIustin Pop <iustin@google.com>
      Reviewed-by: default avatarMichael Hanselmann <hansmi@google.com>
      e375fb61
Loading