service: Workaround for error on s390x #1822
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Problem
As described at #1818, there seems to be a problem when installing at s390x and starting with no available disks. See this comment at the original issue.
After visiting the DASD section and activating+formatting a device, the backend fails and the UI becomes barely usable.
The error is produced when checking
storage_manager.proposalafter re-probing the system and trying an (unsuccessful) proposal.Solution
This pull request does not implement a real fix, but a workaround that has proven to be useful in that case. It allowed the installation to continue successfully at the reported scenario.
I tried to fix the real root of the issue, but I was unable to find out why
storage_manager.proposalwas nil at that point.But since we are rewriting the approach to the storage proposal, the whole
ProposalStrategies::Guidedclass is going to disappear so it makes little sense to invest more time.I will keep the original issue open and will create a Trello card to track it, so we check whether the new implementation of the storage proposal (still under development) is reliable in that situation.
Testing
Verified with manual testing. Going further would be wasting resources right now.