Epic Goal*

RHEL docs state that "Device names managed by udev in /dev/disk/ can change between major releases, requiring link updates." and we have a specific case that became apparent in OCPBUGS-61988 that we need to mitigate for RHEL 10 (OCP 4.22).

sg3_utils 1.48 in RHEL 10 disables a udev rule that creates /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-0NVME_* symlinks on RHEL 9.x. This udev rule is problematic for some customers (i.e. the support cases attached to OCPBUGS-61988) but it is also problematic for others who may already be using those symlinks successfully today because upgrading to RHEL 10 will cause those /dev/disk/by-id symlinks to disappear.

LSO needs some way to rework symlinks for existing PV's. Our current proposal is to introduce a change in OCP 4.21 that allows LSO to choose a better symlink that points to the same device BEFORE the cluster is upgraded to OCP 4.22. There should be an alert on affected clusters notifying the admin what action they should take to resolve the issue before upgrading.

See design notes for more details.

 
Why is this important? (mandatory)

Without this, data may be unavailable after upgrade for affected clusters, requiring support escalations to manually rework the symlinks after upgrade. Even then, it may not be obvious how to reconstruct the symlinks after upgrade, since the original ones are gone by that point.

 
Scenarios (mandatory) 

Provide details for user scenarios including actions to be performed, platform specifications, and user personas.  

 
Dependencies (internal and external) (mandatory)

What items must be delivered by other teams/groups to enable delivery of this epic. 

Contributing Teams(and contacts) (mandatory) 

Our expectation is that teams would modify the list below to fit the epic. Some epics may not need all the default groups but what is included here should accurately reflect who will be involved in delivering the epic.

• Development - 
• Documentation -
• QE - 
• PX - 
• Others -

Acceptance Criteria (optional)

Provide some (testable) examples of how we will know if we have achieved the epic goal.  

Drawbacks or Risk (optional)

Reasons we should consider NOT doing this such as: limited audience for the feature, feature will be superseded by other work that is planned, resulting feature will introduce substantial administrative complexity or user confusion, etc.

Done - Checklist (mandatory)

The following points apply to all epics and are what the OpenShift team believes are the minimum set of criteria that epics should meet for us to consider them potentially shippable. We request that epic owners modify this list to reflect the work to be completed in order to produce something that is potentially shippable.

• CI Testing -  Basic e2e automationTests are merged and completing successfully
• Documentation - Content development is complete.
• QE - Test scenarios are written and executed successfully.
• Technical Enablement - Slides are complete (if requested by PLM)
• Engineering Stories Merged
• All associated work items with the Epic are closed
• Epic status should be “Release Pending”