remove wants on synch targets in soft off #300
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
openbmc/phosphor-state-manager#21 highlights an architecture issue with OpenBMC's use of synchronization targets. When a service, such as pldmSoftPowerOff.service, runs both in a standard power off target, as well as in other paths (like the host graceful quiesce path), there is an issue. The service starts the synchronization targets in the quiesce path and this causes them to already be running on the power off, resulting in the synchronization targets not actually coordinating the power off. The direction this commit takes OpenBMC is that if a service needs to run outside of the standard power on or off path, then they can not have a Wants or Requires clause in the service file. The following commit was done a while back to address this issue: https://gerrit.openbmc.org/c/openbmc/phosphor-state-manager/+/40026 That is that we ensure the primary power on and off targets start the synchronization targets so services requiring them can just use a Before or After clause. The piece that was never done was to go and fix the services which fell into this bucket. Tested: - Did multiple boots, reboots, and host crash tests and saw no issues Signed-off-by: Andrew Geissler <[email protected]> Change-Id: I7260f4aad666acf127f9766cf27dd54f4a18ebe4
|
This is a part of the fix for SW552519 (fw1020.10) |
manojkiraneda
approved these changes
Jul 22, 2022
rfrandse
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 22, 2022
openbmc/phosphor-state-manager#21 highlights an architecture issue with OpenBMC's use of synchronization targets. When a service, such as pldmSoftPowerOff.service, runs both in a standard power off target, as well as in other paths (like the host graceful quiesce path), there is an issue. The service starts the synchronization targets in the quiesce path and this causes them to already be running on the power off, resulting in the synchronization targets not actually coordinating the power off. The direction this commit takes OpenBMC is that if a service needs to run outside of the standard power on or off path, then they can not have a Wants or Requires clause in the service file. The following commit was done a while back to address this issue: https://gerrit.openbmc.org/c/openbmc/phosphor-state-manager/+/40026 That is that we ensure the primary power on and off targets start the synchronization targets so services requiring them can just use a Before or After clause. The piece that was never done was to go and fix the services which fell into this bucket. Tested: - Did multiple boots, reboots, and host crash tests and saw no issues Signed-off-by: Andrew Geissler <[email protected]> Change-Id: I7260f4aad666acf127f9766cf27dd54f4a18ebe4
rfrandse
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 12, 2022
openbmc/phosphor-state-manager#21 highlights an architecture issue with OpenBMC's use of synchronization targets. When a service, such as pldmSoftPowerOff.service, runs both in a standard power off target, as well as in other paths (like the host graceful quiesce path), there is an issue. The service starts the synchronization targets in the quiesce path and this causes them to already be running on the power off, resulting in the synchronization targets not actually coordinating the power off. The direction this commit takes OpenBMC is that if a service needs to run outside of the standard power on or off path, then they can not have a Wants or Requires clause in the service file. The following commit was done a while back to address this issue: https://gerrit.openbmc.org/c/openbmc/phosphor-state-manager/+/40026 That is that we ensure the primary power on and off targets start the synchronization targets so services requiring them can just use a Before or After clause. The piece that was never done was to go and fix the services which fell into this bucket. Tested: - Did multiple boots, reboots, and host crash tests and saw no issues Signed-off-by: Andrew Geissler <[email protected]> Change-Id: I7260f4aad666acf127f9766cf27dd54f4a18ebe4
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.
openbmc/phosphor-state-manager#21 highlights an architecture issue with
OpenBMC's use of synchronization targets. When a service, such as
pldmSoftPowerOff.service, runs both in a standard power off
target, as well as in other paths (like the host graceful quiesce
path), there is an issue.
The service starts the synchronization targets in the quiesce path and
this causes them to already be running on the power off, resulting in
the synchronization targets not actually coordinating the power off.
The direction this commit takes OpenBMC is that if a service needs to
run outside of the standard power on or off path, then they can not
have a Wants or Requires clause in the service file.
The following commit was done a while back to address this issue:
https://gerrit.openbmc.org/c/openbmc/phosphor-state-manager/+/40026
That is that we ensure the primary power on and off targets start the
synchronization targets so services requiring them can just use a
Before or After clause.
The piece that was never done was to go and fix the services which fell
into this bucket.
Tested:
Signed-off-by: Andrew Geissler [email protected]
Change-Id: I7260f4aad666acf127f9766cf27dd54f4a18ebe4