Error when using CLVM in KVM Hypervisor

[Luskan777]

ISSUE TYPE

• Bug Report

COMPONENT NAME

STORAGE
CLVM

CLOUDSTACK VERSION

4.20

CONFIGURATION

OS / ENVIRONMENT

• KVM/libvirt as Virtualization is used
• Ubuntu 22.04.5 LTS (Agent)
• CLVM Primary Storage

SUMMARY

I am trying to use CLVM as Primary Storage, but when I try to add Primary Storage it gives me an error.

However, if I check the KVM agent hosts, it creates the storage pool in libvirt as expected, but it doesn't finish creating the Primary Storage in Cloudstack Management

Cloustack Agents KVM:

STEPS TO REPRODUCE

Using KVM as Hypervisor, try adding a Primary Storage of type CLVM

EXPECTED RESULTS

Primary Storage created successfully

ACTUAL RESULTS

Cloudstack UI:

Request failed. (530)
Failed to add data store: Failed to access storage pool

Cloudstack management (Logs):

DEBUG [c.c.a.t.Request] (AgentManager-Handler-1:[]) (logid:) Seq 18-5556597515245060226: Processing:  { Ans: , MgmtId: 42374915704331, via: 18, Ver: v1, Flags: 10, [{"com.cloud.agent.api.Answer":{"result":"false","details":"java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: No enum constant com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.resource.LibvirtStoragePoolDef.PoolType.LOGICAL
	at java.base/java.lang.Enum.valueOf(Enum.java:273)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.resource.LibvirtStoragePoolDef$PoolType.valueOf(LibvirtStoragePoolDef.java:26)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.resource.LibvirtStoragePoolXMLParser.parseStoragePoolXML(LibvirtStoragePoolXMLParser.java:118)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.storage.LibvirtStorageAdaptor.getStoragePoolDef(LibvirtStorageAdaptor.java:502)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.storage.LibvirtStorageAdaptor.getStoragePool(LibvirtStorageAdaptor.java:534)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.storage.LibvirtStorageAdaptor.getStoragePool(LibvirtStorageAdaptor.java:519)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.storage.LibvirtStorageAdaptor.createStoragePool(LibvirtStorageAdaptor.java:763)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.storage.KVMStoragePoolManager.createStoragePool(KVMStoragePoolManager.java:392)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.storage.KVMStoragePoolManager.createStoragePool(KVMStoragePoolManager.java:386)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.resource.wrapper.LibvirtModifyStoragePoolCommandWrapper.execute(LibvirtModifyStoragePoolCommandWrapper.java:42)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.resource.wrapper.LibvirtModifyStoragePoolCommandWrapper.execute(LibvirtModifyStoragePoolCommandWrapper.java:35)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.resource.wrapper.LibvirtRequestWrapper.execute(LibvirtRequestWrapper.java:78)
	at com.cloud.hypervisor.kvm.resource.LibvirtComputingResource.executeRequest(LibvirtComputingResource.java:1944)
	at com.cloud.agent.Agent.processRequest(Agent.java:686)
	at com.cloud.agent.Agent$AgentRequestHandler.doTask(Agent.java:1109)
	at com.cloud.utils.nio.Task.call(Task.java:83)
	at com.cloud.utils.nio.Task.call(Task.java:29)
	at java.base/java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:264)
	at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1136)
	at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:635)
	at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:840)
","wait":"0","bypassHostMaintenance":"false"}}] }

[DaanHoogland]

@Luskan777 the exception trace means that at the agent side the requested pool type is not recognised. Can you look at the agent log some more related messages above the stack trace.

pooltypes are

ISCSI("iscsi"), NETFS("netfs"), LOGICAL("logical"), DIR("dir"), RBD("rbd"), GLUSTERFS("glusterfs"), POWERFLEX("powerflex")

it seems to be the 'logical' in

<pool type='logical'>

which is not recognised, so that seems a false negative.
any more info is welcome.

[slavkap]

Hi @DaanHoogland, @Luskan777, there was a typo in the PR for upgrading log4j

cloudstack/plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/main/java/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtStoragePoolDef.java

Line 27 in f7b7339

ISCSI("iscsi"), NETFS("netfs"), loggerICAL("logical"), DIR("dir"), RBD("rbd"), GLUSTERFS("glusterfs"), POWERFLEX("powerflex");

after I spoke with @DaanHoogland, this typo is only in version 4.20 not in the version mentioned in the issue

[Luskan777]

Hi @slavkap , @DaanHoogland sorry, I'm on version 4.20.0, I'm using 4.20 to test some features and forgot to revert to 4.19.

However, I noticed that the typo was from PR #7131 , I'll fix it and test to see if everything works as expected.

[weizhouapache]

Hi @DaanHoogland, @Luskan777, there was a typo in the PR for upgrading log4j

cloudstack/plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/main/java/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtStoragePoolDef.java

Line 27 in f7b7339

ISCSI("iscsi"), NETFS("netfs"), loggerICAL("logical"), DIR("dir"), RBD("rbd"), GLUSTERFS("glusterfs"), POWERFLEX("powerflex");

after I spoke with @DaanHoogland, this typo is only in version 4.20 not in the version mentioned in the issue

Good finding
Can you create a pr ? @slavkap

[slavkap]

@weizhouapache, @DaanHoogland already made a fix #9922

[weizhouapache]

@weizhouapache, @DaanHoogland already made a fix #9922

Thanks @slavkap

Sorry , I did not see your pr @DaanHoogland

[DaanHoogland]

However, I noticed that the typo was from PR #7131 , I'll fix it and test to see if everything works as expected.

@Luskan777 , as a matter of formality we ask third party testing. Could you apply #9922 and confirm this solves your issue?

[JoaoJandre]

However, I noticed that the typo was from PR #7131 , I'll fix it and test to see if everything works as expected.

@Luskan777 , as a matter of formality we ask third party testing. Could you apply #9922 and confirm this solves your issue?

I'm sorry @DaanHoogland, I did not see your comment prior to merging. As the change was simple and all the basic merging criteria was met, I did not think we needed third party testing.

[JoaoJandre]

In any case, since the change in #9922 is tied to a bigger problem, we should wait for @Luskan777 to confirm that it fixes #9915. Otherwise, we can create another PR to solve this.

[Luskan777]

However, I noticed that the typo was from PR #7131 , I'll fix it and test to see if everything works as expected.

@Luskan777 , as a matter of formality we ask third party testing. Could you apply #9922 and confirm this solves your issue?

Hi @DaanHoogland, ok, I'm already testing this.

[DaanHoogland]

Hi @DaanHoogland, ok, I'm already testing this.

🙏