[reconfigurator] only clear the "will remove mupdate override" field if inventory is up-to-date#10391
Merged
sunshowers merged 5 commits intomainfrom May 7, 2026
Conversation
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
sunshowers
commented
May 7, 2026
davepacheco
approved these changes
May 7, 2026
Collaborator
davepacheco
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've not reviewed the test output changes but the test changes and code changes look good to me. A second set of eyes would be good.
Comment on lines
+1
to
+5
| # This test exercises the bug where, in the mupdate override flow, the planner | ||
| # would clear `remove_mupdate_override` from a sled's blueprint based on stale | ||
| # inventory -- specifically, an inventory collection that was captured before | ||
| # the sled was mupdated, so the override marker isn't visible in it. | ||
| # |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit, take it or leave it: I generally frame this sort of thing without reference to the past... as in: "This test verifies that when resolving a MUPdate, the system correctly avoids resolving images when the inventory is stale."
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changed this to not refer to the bug but rather to the correct behavior:
# This test verifies that when resolving a MUPdate, the planner does not clear
# the "will remove mupdate override" field from a sled's blueprint based on stale
# inventory -- specifically, an inventory collection that occurred before
# the sled was MUPdated, so the mupdate override UUID isn't visible in it.
karencfv
approved these changes
May 7, 2026
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
jgallagher
approved these changes
May 7, 2026
Contributor
Author
|
Tested this on berlin and the happy path appears to work well. The race condition is a bit hard to set up in a live system but we have reproduced it in the simulator (and this PR includes a test). |
This file contains hidden or 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.
In #10392, we found while progressing along the MUPdate recovery state machine (RFD 556), duelling Nexuses might trample over each other based on stale inventory.
The specific reproduction is covered in the added reconfigurator-cli test, but to recap: Let's say there are two inventory collections, C1 and C2. C1 was collected right before the MUPdate, and C2 right after. Then, the failure happens if:
The fix in this PR is to use the Sled Agent generation number stored in the parent blueprint as an indicator. If the Sled Agent generation gathered from inventory is older than that, then that is a sign that inventory is stale, and we shouldn't clear the "will remove mupdate override" field as a result.
We're hoping to cherry-pick this PR onto the r19 release branch. There is a very similar bug around setting the "will remove mupdate override" field as well. We believe the downsides of that bug are not as bad (i.e. the planner doesn't end up along a path which makes things worse), so we're currently not planning to pick that for 19.3. (We would like to get this bug fixed for release 20 though -- expect a PR for it soon.)