Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

default.conf example for COPY_AS_IS_EXCLUDE_TSM #3212

Merged
merged 3 commits into from May 3, 2024

Conversation

jsmeix
Copy link
Member

@jsmeix jsmeix commented Apr 30, 2024

In default.conf explain how one could reduce
the size of the ReaR recovery system initrd
in particular on POWER architecture
via COPY_AS_IS_TSM and alternatively
via COPY_AS_IS_EXCLUDE_TSM and additionally
via MODULES=( 'loaded_modules' ),
see #3189

In default.conf explain how one could reduce
the size of the ReaR recovery system initrd
in particular on POWER architecture
via COPY_AS_IS_TSM and alternatively
via COPY_AS_IS_EXCLUDE_TSM and additionally
via MODULES=( 'loaded_modules' ),
see #3189
@jsmeix jsmeix added enhancement Adaptions and new features documentation labels Apr 30, 2024
@jsmeix jsmeix added this to the ReaR v2.8 milestone Apr 30, 2024
@jsmeix jsmeix self-assigned this Apr 30, 2024
Also mention using better (but slower) compression
for the ReaR recovery system as another generic method.
@jsmeix jsmeix requested a review from a team May 2, 2024 11:53
@schlomo
Copy link
Member

schlomo commented May 2, 2024

Thanks for the info about IBM Spectrum Protect, I didn't know that.

If there is a general size limit for the initrd on POWER systems then I would expect a check for that, aborting if the initrd is too large (since we know that it won't boot).

We might also add code to automatically enable some space reducing features, like loading less modules and no extra firmware files.

Finally, if we could update the TSM configuration in ReaR to reflect modern TSM agents, that would be of course really great. Maybe @schabrolles can add some knowledge to this?

Otherwise of course the change in comments is fine, although personally I find it a little bit misplaced under the TSM section. Maybe better add a file to the docs directory explaining about ReaR on POWER?

Also mention that on POWER by default
no firmware files are included in the initrd.
@jsmeix
Copy link
Member Author

jsmeix commented May 3, 2024

I cannot properly implement a check that errors out
because I am not at all a sufficient POWER expert.

There are several different kind of POWER systems
and several different ways how to boot them.
I assume that vague 128 - 4 = 124 MiB limit
does not apply to all POWER boot methods
so we cannot eror out in any case on POWER
when ReaR's initrd is e.g. bigger than 123 MiB.

Regarding why the initrd size limit is vague:
A colleague told me:

The absolute limit you can push (in our case)
is 128 MB = 131072 KB (in binary).
But in fact IBM always adds some prep boot
(service data, their own "magic") data to that block.
And we were able to fill only 123 MB = 125952 KB.
And that is bad from IBM side as they are one
of the developers of the IEC standard
(because of the punch cards), but you will
never find it black on white on their site.

I.e. it is unknown how big that additional data is
so it is unknown how much less than 128 MiB is left
for the initrd.
Therein note the "in our case":
This means the case where things were tested at SUSE.
By trial and error (via artificially increasing the
initrd) colleagues as SUSE found that 123 MiB limit
on the POWER system where they tested things.
That POWER system reported errors during boot
when the initrd was too big in contrast to
#3189
where
https://github.com/rear/rear/files/14837101/boot.log
shows nothing - just a kernel panic at the end that
tells noting about its root cause.

What I may implement is a LogPrint() or LogPrintError()
user information when the inird is bigger than 120 MiB
that tells about the vague 128 - 4 = 124 MiB limit
so the user is at least informed that booting may fail
(depending on his specific case).

Same basic reasoning (i.e. "it depends")
for including a reduced/minimal TSM client:
When the initrd size does not matter in some cases
then the full TSM client should normally be included
to have all TSM client functionality available
during ReaR recovery system runtime.

On POWER by default no firmware files are included, cf.
#3189 (comment)
which I now also mention here via my recent
10436d8

Whether or not MODULES=( 'loaded_modules' ) works
depends on whether or not the replacement hardware or VM
is fully compatible with the original system.
I don't know if on POWER the replacement VM
is always fully compatible with the original VM?
As far as I know on POWER there is always a VM
but there are different kind of VMs on POWER.

I also find it somewhat misplaced under the TSM section
but that is all what I can do for now with my rather limited
available time - in particular I will first and foremost
continue with #3189
to help our customer - "customers first" ;-)
Now there are multipath issues - again an area where
I have zero personal experience with - so I need to
somehow find my way through that stuff - hopefully as in
#3189 (comment)
where my vague intuitiveness revealed the root cause...

@jsmeix
Copy link
Member Author

jsmeix commented May 3, 2024

I will merge it now.
I ignore the two current CI errors

testing-farm:fedora-40-x86_64 — Error
testing-farm:fedora-rawhide-x86_64 — Error

that both show at
https://artifacts.dev.testing-farm.io/59b815ee-d4a4-46b4-a0db-fe3070972188/
and
https://artifacts.dev.testing-farm.io/1c4a3dd1-8744-4ffb-b8f4-3ee0db996581/
(excerpts)

fail: Failed to pull workdir from the guest.
 This usually means that login as 'root' to the guest does not work.
fail: Command 'yum install -y rsync' returned 255.
...
ssh: connect to host [IP address] port 22: Connection timed out

because the changes here are only comments in default.conf
so the changes here cannot be a cause of those CI failures.

@jsmeix jsmeix merged commit 7b2354e into master May 3, 2024
19 of 21 checks passed
@jsmeix jsmeix deleted the jsmeix-COPY_AS_IS_EXCLUDE_TSM branch May 3, 2024 11:59
@jsmeix
Copy link
Member Author

jsmeix commented May 3, 2024

@gdha @schlomo
thank you for review and comments!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants