[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-12-04 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-12-04 05:10 EDT---
Hi Cannonical,
I created a new bugzilla missed to close it! This is the new bugzilla I raised 
and as mentioned in comment 118 
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/debian-installer/+bug/2133480 this 
bug is been tracked here.

Thanks,
Anushree Mathur

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-12-04 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-12-04 05:03 EDT---
(In reply to comment #117)
> Today I setup a system with two LUNs (could do more if needed), both are
> connected to their own pair of two HBAs, again each with 2 paths, and I
> could complete a default 25.10 installation on the first LUN (however, on a
> different architecture):
>
> $ sudo multipath -ll
> mpatha (3600507630bffd3d70005) dm-0 IBM,2107900
> size=96G features='1 queue_if_no_path' hwhandler='1 alua' wp=rw
> `-+- policy='service-time 0' prio=50 status=active
> |- 0:0:0:1074085888 sda 8:0  active ready running
> |- 0:0:1:1074085888 sdb 8:16 active ready running
> |- 1:0:0:1074085888 sdc 8:32 active ready running
> `- 1:0:1:1074085888 sdd 8:48 active ready running
> mpathb (3600507630bffd3d70107) dm-4 IBM,2107900
> size=96G features='1 queue_if_no_path' hwhandler='1 alua' wp=rw
> `-+- policy='service-time 0' prio=50 status=active
> |- 3:0:0:1074216961 sdg 8:96  active ready running
> |- 3:0:1:1074216961 sdh 8:112 active ready running
> |- 2:0:0:1074216961 sde 8:64  active ready running
> `- 2:0:1:1074216961 sdf 8:80  active ready running
>
> I installed the OS on the first LUN, but did nothing with the second.
>
> $ sudo dmsetup ls --tree
> mpatha-part1 (252:1)
> ??mpatha (252:0)
> ?? (8:48)
> ?? (8:32)
> ?? (8:16)
> ?? (8:0)
> mpathb (252:4)
> ?? (8:80)
> ?? (8:64)
> ?? (8:112)
> ?? (8:96)
> ubuntu--vg-ubuntu--lv (252:3)
> ??mpatha-part2 (252:2)
> ??mpatha (252:0)
> ?? (8:48)
> ?? (8:32)
> ?? (8:16)
> ?? (8:0)
>
> So I need to know more about your particular setup:
> # of HBAs
> # LUNs
> # paths
> # if you installed on just one LUN (and didn't touched the other during
> install)
> # or if you did an install across LUNs (parts of the filesystem on LUN #1
> and other parts on LUN #2)
> etc.
> to be able to recreate a system that is closer to your ...

Hi Canonical,

Discussion on the new bug has been moved to a new launchpad bug
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/debian-installer/+bug/2133480 which 
has the necessary details on the current recreate.

This bug will be closed once verified, as it was originally reported for
installation failure on system with single multipath which is fixed now.

~ Vaibhav

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-11-27 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-11-28 00:00 EDT---
Hi Canonical,
I tried to recreate this same scernario on ubuntu25.10, in the latest case it 
is crashing with the exact same crash message as below

generating crash report
report saved to /var/crash/1760429899.735880613.ui.crash
Traceback (most recent call last):
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/client/controllers/filesystem.py",
 line 296, in _guided_choice
self.ui.set_body(FilesystemView(self.model, self))

File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/filesystem.py",
 line 485, in __init__
self.refresh_model_inputs()
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/filesystem.py",
 line 544, in refresh_model_inputs
self.used_list.refresh_model_inputs()
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/filesystem.py",
 line 417, in refresh_model_inputs
for obj, cells in summarize_device(device, filter):

File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/helpers.py",
 line 32, in summarize_device
anns = labels.annotations(device) + labels.usage_labels(device)
^^
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/usr/lib/python3.12/functools.py", line 909, in 
wrapper
return dispatch(args[0].__class__)(*args, **kw)

File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/common/filesystem/labels.py",
 line 101, in _annotations_vg
member = next(iter(vg.devices))
^^
StopIteration

The above exception was the direct cause of the following exception:

Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/usr/bin/subiquity", line 8, in 
sys.exit(main())
^^
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/cmd/tui.py", 
line 161, in main
asyncio.run(run_with_loop())
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/usr/lib/python3.12/asyncio/runners.py", line 194, in 
run
return runner.run(main)

File "/snap/subiquity/6868/usr/lib/python3.12/asyncio/runners.py", line 118, in 
run
return self._loop.run_until_complete(task)
^^^
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/usr/lib/python3.12/asyncio/base_events.py", line 
687, in run_until_complete
return future.result()
^^^
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/cmd/tui.py", 
line 159, in run_with_loop
await subiquity_interface.run()
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/client/client.py", 
line 426, in run
await super().run()
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquitycore/tui.py", 
line 390, in run
await super().run()
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquitycore/core.py", 
line 133, in run
raise exc
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/client/controllers/filesystem.py",
 line 300, in show_guided_and_redraw
await self._guided_choice(choice)
RuntimeError: coroutine raised StopIteration

But this time the scenario is changed, it is crashing with multipath multiple
SAN disks installation only! So as the scenario has been changed, will be 
raising a new bug explaining whole scenario and closing this bug.

Thanks,
Anushree Mathur

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-11-07 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-11-07 03:26 EDT---
Hi canonical,

Required logs are attached. May I request you to take a look in the logs
and the issue.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-10-18 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-09-30 04:25 EDT---
Hey Canonical team,
I can able to boot the iso successfully. We can close this bug thread.
Thanks for all your efforts.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-10-18 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-10-16 01:18 EDT---
Yes, issue is with latest Ubuntu 25.04 Plucky and I tried the latest Ubuntu 
25.10 Questing Quokka image that you have mentioned. I have attached the crash 
report.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-10-18 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-09-22 01:59 EDT---
Hey Canonical, due some reason, we still need to test this, once I have done 
that I'll update here.

Thanks!!

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-10-17 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-10-16 14:39 EDT---
Sure, let me look that ASAP.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-10-17 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-10-06 06:04 EDT---
(In reply to comment #99)
> aditi.0205, thanks for the confirmation that the questing daily ISOs are
> booting on the affected hardware, that is good news.
>
> We can SRU this fix to Noble, but first I would like confirmation that the
> questing install runs to completion and that the **target system** with
> multipath + LVM does in fact boot correctly.

Yes, I have checked its working fine as you mentioned. We just want to
make sure that everything comes to an end with the desire result that is
U24.04 also works fine and therefore want to open this bug until the
test of noble.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-10-17 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-10-15 05:07 EDT---
Hey canonical,

After rechecking, I realized my earlier testing was not accurate. I?ve retested 
now, and the issue still persists in the latest 25.04 version.
Please consider this as a valid issue. Apologies for the earlier confusion.

generating crash report
report saved to /var/crash/1760429899.735880613.ui.crash
Traceback (most recent call last):
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/client/controllers/filesystem.py",
 line 296, in _guided_choice
self.ui.set_body(FilesystemView(self.model, self))

File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/filesystem.py",
 line 485, in __init__
self.refresh_model_inputs()
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/filesystem.py",
 line 544, in refresh_model_inputs
self.used_list.refresh_model_inputs()
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/filesystem.py",
 line 417, in refresh_model_inputs
for obj, cells in summarize_device(device, filter):

File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/helpers.py",
 line 32, in summarize_device
anns = labels.annotations(device) + labels.usage_labels(device)
^^
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/usr/lib/python3.12/functools.py", line 909, in 
wrapper
return dispatch(args[0].__class__)(*args, **kw)

File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/common/filesystem/labels.py",
 line 101, in _annotations_vg
member = next(iter(vg.devices))
^^
StopIteration

The above exception was the direct cause of the following exception:

Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/usr/bin/subiquity", line 8, in 
sys.exit(main())
^^
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/cmd/tui.py", 
line 161, in main
asyncio.run(run_with_loop())
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/usr/lib/python3.12/asyncio/runners.py", line 194, in 
run
return runner.run(main)

File "/snap/subiquity/6868/usr/lib/python3.12/asyncio/runners.py", line 118, in 
run
return self._loop.run_until_complete(task)
^^^
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/usr/lib/python3.12/asyncio/base_events.py", line 
687, in run_until_complete
return future.result()
^^^
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/cmd/tui.py", 
line 159, in run_with_loop
await subiquity_interface.run()
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/client/client.py", 
line 426, in run
await super().run()
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquitycore/tui.py", 
line 390, in run
await super().run()
File "/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquitycore/core.py", 
line 133, in run
raise exc
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6868/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/client/controllers/filesystem.py",
 line 300, in show_guided_and_redraw
await self._guided_choice(choice)
RuntimeError: coroutine raised StopIteration
^[[29;1R^[[29;106R
Ubuntu Questing Quokka (development branch) ubuntu-server hvc

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-09-30 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-09-30 04:41 EDT---
I have missed point that I need to try 24.04 also. Hence, waiting for that.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-08-27 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-08-28 01:32 EDT---
Let me verify and update here soon.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-07-29 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-07-29 10:12 EDT---
Thanks for the confirmation. Hence we can close this bug.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-06-18 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-06-18 07:34 EDT---
(In reply to comment #74)
> Found a possible fix for this bug
> ===
>
> I tried adding multipath module to the installer initrd via initramfs-tools.
> This had the effect of initializing multipath during early initrd and before
> dm-multipath and lvm were initialized. With this change ( also a possible
> bug fix in initramfs-tools described below ) the dm-multipath disks were
> properly probed and recognized by probert.
>
> Possible issue with initramfs-tools
> ===
>
> I see initramfs-tools ( to be more accurate ubuntu's multipath-tools
> package) only add two scripts:
> * init-top to invoke multipathd
> * local-bottom to kill the instance of multipathd
>
> However since local-bottom script will only be invoked if initrd is directly
> booting from a multipath disk hence its never invoked during installation
> and running instance of multipathd is never killed. This has an unfortunate
> side effect of  interfering with curtin's multipathd service which fails due
> to an existing instance of multipathd running.
>
> Fixing the possible issue with initramfs-tools and multipath-tools
> 
> To fix this, I copied the local-bottom copy of multipath script to
> 'init-bottom' which would be invoked before curtin's init is invoked. This
> change ensured that early-init instance of multipathd will be terminated and
> new instance of multipath.service from curtin comes up fine.
>
> Changes suggested
> 
> * Add multipath module to installer initrd via initramfs-tools. So that
> multipath volumes are initialized before lvm is initialized.
> * Update multipath-tools to also add a init-bottom script to initramfs-tool
> scripts so that early-initrd instance of multipathd is terminated before
> curtin's multipathd daemon is invoked.

Hello Ubuntu Team,

Do you have any updates/suggestions on this possible solution?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-06-07 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-06-07 16:08 EDT---
Found a possible fix for this bug
===

I tried adding multipath module to the installer initrd via initramfs-
tools. This had the effect of initializing multipath during early initrd
and before dm-multipath and lvm were initialized. With this change (
also a possible bug fix in initramfs-tools described below ) the dm-
multipath disks were properly probed and recognized by probert.

Possible issue with initramfs-tools
===

I see initramfs-tools ( to be more accurate ubuntu's multipath-tools package) 
only add two scripts:
* init-top to invoke multipathd
* local-bottom to kill the instance of multipathd

However since local-bottom script will only be invoked if initrd is
directly booting from a multipath disk hence its never invoked during
installation and running instance of multipathd is never killed. This
has an unfortunate side effect of  interfering with curtin's multipathd
service which fails due to an existing instance of multipathd running.

Fixing the possible issue with initramfs-tools and multipath-tools

To fix this, I copied the local-bottom copy of multipath script to  
'init-bottom' which would be invoked before curtin's init is invoked. This 
change ensured that early-init instance of multipathd will be terminated and 
new instance of multipath.service from curtin comes up fine.

Changes suggested

* Add multipath module to installer initrd via initramfs-tools. So that 
multipath volumes are initialized before lvm is initialized.
* Update multipath-tools to also add a init-bottom script to initramfs-tool 
scripts so that early-initrd instance of multipathd is terminated before 
curtin's multipathd daemon is invoked.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-04-23 Thread bugproxy
Only on actually going to deployment did it crash.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-04-07 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-04-07 06:56 EDT---
OS : 25.04 [Plucky_Puffin]
For the ubuntu 25.04 also I am seeing the exact same issue.

connecting...
generating crash report
report saved to /var/crash/1744021934.059317589.ui.crash
Traceback (most recent call last):
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6468/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/client/controllers/filesystem.py",
 line 296, in _guided_choice
self.ui.set_body(FilesystemView(self.model, self))

File 
"/snap/subiquity/6468/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/filesystem.py",
 line 485, in __init__
self.refresh_model_inputs()
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6468/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/filesystem.py",
 line 543, in refresh_model_inputs
self.avail_list.refresh_model_inputs()
File 
"/snap/subiquity/6468/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/filesystem.py",
 line 417, in refresh_model_inputs
for obj, cells in summarize_device(device, filter):

File 
"/snap/subiquity/6468/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/ui/views/filesystem/helpers.py",
 line 32, in summarize_device
anns = labels.annotations(device) + labels.usage_labels(device)
^^
File "/snap/subiquity/6468/usr/lib/python3.12/functools.py", line 909, in 
wrapper
return dispatch(args[0].__class__)(*args, **kw)

File 
"/snap/subiquity/6468/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/common/filesystem/labels.py",
 line 100, in _annotations_vg
member = next(iter(vg.devices))
^^
StopIteration

The above exception was the direct cause of the following exception:

Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/snap/subiquity/6468/usr/bin/subiquity", line 8, in 
sys.exit(main())
^^
File "/snap/subiquity/6468/lib/python3.12/site-packages/subiquity/cmd/tui.py", 
line 161, in main

Serial  [ Help ]


??
??
?  Sorry, the installer has restarted because of an error.   ?
??
?   [ View full report  ]?
??
?  If you want to help improve the installer, you can send an error  ?
?  report.   ?
??
?   [ Send to Canonical ]?
??
?  Select continue to try the installation again.?
??
?   [ Continue  ]?
??
??

If it is anyhow helpful attaching the latest crash reported generated
this time!

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-04-04 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-04-03 06:11 EDT---
(In reply to comment #66)
> No, it's not fixed yet - we are still investigating whether we can tackle
> the root course of the issue, or just catch the error and go with the
> suggested workaround.

Thanks Frank. Someone in community had inquired about this issue as they
ran into similar problem. It will be good to identify a fix.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-03-31 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-04-01 02:04 EDT---
Is a fix available for this issue in latest 24.04.xx builds or 25.04?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-03-03 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-03-03 06:26 EDT---
Hi Olivier,

I collected the machine profile on the logical partition where this installer
crash is observed consistently by running the below command:

PYTHONPATH=probert ./probert/bin/probert --all > mymachine.json

as mentioned at the below link in upstream Subiquity:

https://github.com/canonical/subiquity/blob/main/README.md#:~:text=PYTHONPATH%3Dprobert%20./probert/bin/probert%20%2D%2Dall%20%3E%20mymachine.json

Then I was able to recreate the same crash symptoms by DRY-RUNNING the Subiquity
installer with this collected machine profile and proceeding with the on-screen
instructions on both PPC and x86 hosts as below:

make dryrun MACHINE=machine_profile.json

I hope this enables you to recreate the installer crash issue on your setup and
root cause the actual issue. I'm attaching the machine profile for you to look
at and please let me know if you'd require any further information.

~ Amit

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-02-18 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-02-18 13:33 EDT---
Hi Olivier,

Please find my response inline:

(In reply to comment #51)
> Hello,
>
> I tried to reproduce the issue again today. Although this time the installer
> didn't crash ("$ vgs" and "$ lvs" returned valid information), I was in a
> scenario somewhat similar to what I described in comment 29:
>

We can still recreate the installer crash issue on our setups with 100% hit
rate.

> $ dmesg
> [ 1221.355112] device-mapper: table: 252:1: multipath: error getting device
> (-EBUSY)
> [ 1221.355116] device-mapper: ioctl: error adding target to table
> [ 1221.32] device-mapper: table: 252:1: multipath: error getting device
> (-EBUSY)
> [ 1221.34] device-mapper: ioctl: error adding target to table
> [ 1232.281218] device-mapper: table: 252:1: multipath: error getting device
> (-EBUSY)
> [ 1232.281223] device-mapper: ioctl: error adding target to table
> [ 1232.281668] device-mapper: table: 252:1: multipath: error getting device
> (-EBUSY)
> [ 1232.281670] device-mapper: ioctl: error adding target to table
>

Yes, we do observe the below log as well on our setup.

root@ubuntu:~# cat dmesg.log | grep -i device-mapper
// Before installer crash
[0.185330] device-mapper: core: CONFIG_IMA_DISABLE_HTABLE is disabled. 
Duplicate IMA measurements will not be recorded in the IMA log.
[0.185358] device-mapper: uevent: version 1.0.3
[0.185473] device-mapper: ioctl: 4.48.0-ioctl (2023-03-01) initialised: 
[email protected]
[   12.287513] systemd[1]: Listening on dm-event.socket - Device-mapper event 
daemon FIFOs.
[   12.346628] systemd[1]: Starting multipathd.service - Device-Mapper 
Multipath Device Controller...
[   12.751023] device-mapper: multipath service-time: version 0.3.0 loaded
[   12.751190] device-mapper: table: 252:3: multipath: error getting device 
(-EBUSY)
[   12.751202] device-mapper: ioctl: error adding target to table
[   12.917597] device-mapper: table: 252:6: multipath: error getting device 
(-EBUSY)
[   12.917614] device-mapper: ioctl: error adding target to table
// After installer crash
[  133.571464] device-mapper: table: 252:12: multipath: error getting device 
(-EBUSY)
[  133.571471] device-mapper: ioctl: error adding target to table
[  133.572728] device-mapper: table: 252:12: multipath: error getting device 
(-EBUSY)
[  133.572731] device-mapper: ioctl: error adding target to table

> $ systemctl status multipath-tools
> * multipathd.service - Device-Mapper Multipath Device Controller
> Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/multipathd.service; enabled; preset:
> enabled)
> Active: active (running) since Wed 2025-02-12 12:36:57 UTC; 20min ago
> TriggeredBy: * multipathd.socket
> Main PID: 911 (multipathd)
> Status: "up"
> Tasks: 7
> Memory: 20.3M (peak: 20.5M)
> CPU: 213ms
> CGroup: /system.slice/multipathd.service
> `-911 /sbin/multipathd -d -s
>
> Feb 12 12:36:57 ubuntu-server multipathd[911]: libdevmapper:
> ioctl/libdm-iface.c(1990): device-mapper: reload ioctl on mpatha (252:1)
> failed: Device or resource busy
> Feb 12 12:36:57 ubuntu-server multipathd[911]: dm_addmap: libdm task=0
> error: Device or resource busy
> Feb 12 12:36:57 ubuntu-server multipathd[911]: mpatha: ignoring map
> Feb 12 12:36:57 ubuntu-server multipathd[911]: sda: setting scsi timeouts is
> unsupported for protocol scsi:unspec
> Feb 12 12:36:57 ubuntu-server multipathd[911]: sdb: setting scsi timeouts is
> unsupported for protocol scsi:unspec
> Feb 12 12:36:57 ubuntu-server multipathd[911]: mpatha: addmap [0 25165824
> multipath 0 0 2 1 service-time 0 1 1 8:0 1 service-time 0 1 1 8:16 1]
> Feb 12 12:36:57 ubuntu-server multipathd[911]: libdevmapper:
> ioctl/libdm-iface.c(1990): device-mapper: reload ioctl on mpatha (252:1)
> failed: Device or resource busy
> Feb 12 12:36:57 ubuntu-server multipathd[911]: dm_addmap: libdm task=0
> error: Device or resource busy
> Feb 12 12:36:57 ubuntu-server multipathd[911]: mpatha: ignoring map
> Feb 12 12:36:57 ubuntu-server systemd[1]: Started multipathd.service -
> Device-Mapper Multipath Device Controller.
>

Yes.

root@ubuntu:~# systemctl status multipath-tools
* multipathd.service - Device-Mapper Multipath Device Controller
Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/multipathd.service; enabled; preset: 
enabled)
Active: active (running) since Tue 2025-02-18 14:17:45 UTC; 8min ago
TriggeredBy: * multipathd.socket
Main PID: 2112 (multipathd)
Status: "up"
Tasks: 7
Memory: 37.6M (peak: 45.6M)
CPU: 468ms
CGroup: /system.slice/multipathd.service
`-2112 /sbin/multipathd -d -s

Feb 18 14:17:45 ubuntu-server multipathd[2112]: dm_addmap: libdm task=0 error: 
Device or resource busy
Feb 18 14:17:45 ubuntu-server multipathd[2112]: mpatha: ignoring map
Feb 18 14:17:45 ubuntu-server multipathd[2112]: mpathb: addmap [0 230686720 
multipath 1 queue_if_no_path 1 alua 2 1 service-time 0 1 1 8:112 1 service-time 
0 1 1 8:48 1]
Feb 18 14:17:45 ubuntu-server multipathd[2112]: mpathc: addmap [0 230686720 
m

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-01-10 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-01-10 11:12 EDT---
(In reply to comment #49)
> Hi Amit,
> so far we faild to recreate this case, neither on ppc64el nor on a different
> platform.
>
> So first of all the recommendation (and to unblock in such cases) is still
> the workaround mentioned here:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/comments/4
>
> We briefly discussed if the disk setup was maybe created by a different OS
> (like AIX)
> and that we may could implement the workaround in a better way.
>
> You mentioned that this also happens with FC40, that might be an indication
> that is only happens with a relatively modern multipath stack.
>

Hi Frank,

I meant the Ubuntu installer crash is hit with the pre-existing multipath disk
setup from Ubuntu 24.04 and Fedora installations both. We do *NOT* see this
problem with a Fedora installation on top of any existing installation but the
crash is *only* observed with the Ubuntu installer. And the Ubuntu installer
crash has been 100% reproducible on our setup.

Thanks,
Amit

> Do you have mor information about the FC40 case, maybe an upstream bug, that
> allows to join forces?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2025-01-09 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2025-01-10 01:00 EDT---
Are there any further updates on this issue?

Thanks,
Amit

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2024-12-02 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2024-12-02 03:12 EDT---
Hi Frank,

Sorry for the late reply. Please find the information below:

(In reply to comment #44)
> Now trying to find some differences in the systems,
> you already shared the lsblk output in comment #26.
>
> Would you mind also sharing the output of:
> multipath -ll
> lscpu
> and
> lsmem
> ?

root@ubuntu-server:/# multipath -ll
mpatha (360050768108001b3a80002f5) dm-1 IBM,2145
size=20G features='1 queue_if_no_path' hwhandler='1 alua' wp=rw
|-+- policy='service-time 0' prio=50 status=active
| `- 1:0:1:0 sdd 8:48 active ready running
`-+- policy='service-time 0' prio=10 status=enabled
`- 1:0:0:0 sdb 8:16 active ready running

root@ubuntu-server:/# lscpu
Architecture: ppc64le
Byte Order: Little Endian
CPU(s):   96
On-line CPU(s) list:0-95
Model name:   POWER10 (architected), altivec supported
Model:  2.0 (pvr 0080 0200)
Thread(s) per core: 8
Core(s) per socket: 3
Socket(s):  4
Virtualization features:
Hypervisor vendor:  pHyp
Virtualization type:para
Caches (sum of all):
L1d:768 KiB (24 instances)
L1i:1.1 MiB (24 instances)
L2: 24 MiB (24 instances)
L3: 96 MiB (24 instances)
NUMA:
NUMA node(s):   4
NUMA node0 CPU(s):  0-23
NUMA node1 CPU(s):  24-47
NUMA node2 CPU(s):  48-71
NUMA node3 CPU(s):  72-95
Vulnerabilities:
Gather data sampling:   Not affected
Itlb multihit:  Not affected
L1tf:   Not affected
Mds:Not affected
Meltdown:   Not affected
Mmio stale data:Not affected
Reg file data sampling: Not affected
Retbleed:   Not affected
Spec rstack overflow:   Not affected
Spec store bypass:  Not affected
Spectre v1: Mitigation; __user pointer sanitization, ori31 specula
tion barrier enabled
Spectre v2: Mitigation; Software count cache flush (hardware accel
erated), Software link stack flush
Srbds:  Not affected
Tsx async abort:Not affected

root@ubuntu-server:/# lsmem
RANGE  SIZE  STATE REMOVABLE  BLOCK
0x-0x003f  256G online   yes 0-1023

Memory block size:   256M
Total online memory: 256G
Total offline memory:  0B

>
> And the existing disk configuration (before the wipefs), where did it came
> from - or how was it generated?
> Was it a previous Ubuntu installation (which release), or a different Linux
> OS (like RH, which release?) or even a different OS (partially), like AIX?

Please note that we can recreate this problem consistently on our setup with
Ubuntu 24.04.1 and Fedora 40 installations on the LPAR. In addition to that,
it's just a single OS setup.

Please let me know if there's any specific information I may help you
with.

Thanks,
Amit

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2080474] Comment bridged from LTC Bugzilla

2024-11-25 Thread bugproxy
--- Comment From [email protected] 2024-11-25 01:26 EDT---
(In reply to comment #44)
> Now trying to find some differences in the systems,
> you already shared the lsblk output in comment #26.
>
> Would you mind also sharing the output of:
> multipath -ll
> lscpu
> and
> lsmem
> ?
>
> And the existing disk configuration (before the wipefs), where did it came
> from - or how was it generated?
> Was it a previous Ubuntu installation (which release), or a different Linux
> OS (like RH, which release?) or even a different OS (partially), like AIX?

Do we have any further progress here?   Thanks!

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080474

Title:
  ubuntu installation failing for systems having SAN disk

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2080474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs