[Bug 1379591] Re: Moonshot nodes with Mellanox interfaces fail to deploy in maas 1.7

[Christian Reis]

> Is there a reason we need to store the names of the interfaces? Can't we just bring up each interface using an index,
> eth0 - ethN. Or do some interfaces require a specific naming convention?

I don't think it's reasonable to think we can change system interface
names without a lot of fallout.


** Also affects: lshw
   Importance: Undecided
       Status: New

** Also affects: lshw (Ubuntu)
   Importance: Undecided
       Status: New

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Foundations Bugs, which is subscribed to lshw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1379591

Title:
  Moonshot nodes with Mellanox interfaces fail to deploy in maas 1.7

Status in lshw - Hardware Lister:
  New
Status in MAAS:
  In Progress
Status in “lshw” package in Ubuntu:
  New

Bug description:
  I have been very active in maas 1.7 lately with the introduction of
  support for arm64.

  Last night while debugging an issue with bug#  https://bugs.launchpad.net/maas/+bug/1377969
  I upgraded my environment from : 1.7.0~beta4+bzr3168-0ubuntu1~trusty1 -> 1.7.0~beta5+bzr3198-0ubuntu1

  I was purely focused on my x64 cartridges at the time,  Today while
  preoccupied with other issues, I noticed that my arm64 && armhf nodes
  were failing to deploy in the Maas Gui.  After having an ARMHF & ARM64
  node both fail on me while trying to complete some tasks, I began to
  investigate.

  I have found that during commissioning of the node all behaves as
  expected.  The nodes drop into a ready status and can be Acquired ->
  Started.

  Once the user starts a nodes the image appears to go through the first
  stage of installation via curtin, the node then reboots, Upon booting
  off of the disk the following occurs in Maas 1.7 Beta5 :

  https://pastebin.canonical.com/118530/

  The first error I see is that cloud init fails to bring up eth0, which
  is followed by a traceback. which eventually leads to a failed
  deployment


  Now, here is the output from the same process, same boot images , same
  type of node (arm64)  except run from maas 1.7 beta4

  https://pastebin.canonical.com/118529/

  As you can see, the node successfully deploys and we don't see a
  traceback.

  In both cases I am using the same boot-source :  http://maas.ubuntu.com/images/ephemeral-v2/releases/
  both servers also report the same boot-images when queried against their corresponding UUID  

      {
          "subarchitecture": "xgene-uboot", 
          "osystem": "ubuntu", 
          "label": "release", 
          "architecture": "arm64", 
          "release": "trusty", 
          "purpose": "commissioning"
      }, 
      {
          "subarchitecture": "xgene-uboot", 
          "osystem": "ubuntu", 
          "label": "release", 
          "architecture": "arm64", 
          "release": "trusty", 
          "purpose": "install"
      }, 
      {
          "subarchitecture": "xgene-uboot", 
          "osystem": "ubuntu", 
          "label": "release", 
          "architecture": "arm64", 
          "release": "trusty", 
          "purpose": "xinstall"
      }, 
      {
          "subarchitecture": "xgene-uboot", 
          "osystem": "ubuntu", 
          "label": "release", 
          "architecture": "arm64", 
          "release": "trusty", 
          "purpose": "diskless"
      }, 

  I can supply more information if required

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/lshw/+bug/1379591/+subscriptions