Bug #44236
openUnlocking lab machines is not intuitive
0%
Description
I locked a smithi using a command like this:
teuthology-lock --machine-type smithi --lock-many 1 --os-type opensuse --os-version 15.2 --owner foo
This worked great, however:
(virtualenv) smithfarm@teuthology:~/teuthology$ teuthology-lock -a --brief | grep smithfarm smithi183.front.sepia.ceph.com locked smithfarm "None" (virtualenv) smithfarm@teuthology:~/teuthology$ teuthology-lock --unlock smithi183.front.sepia.ceph.com 2020-02-21 09:59:38,920.920 ERROR:teuthology.lock.ops:Failed to unlock: smithi183.front.sepia.ceph.com
With some help from Thomas Bechtold, I was able to unlock it by doing something like this:
$ teuthology-lock --list-targets --owner smithfarm > mine.yml $ teuthology-nuke -t mine.yml -r -u --owner smithfarm
Updated by Nathan Cutler about 4 years ago
- Subject changed from I locked a smithi, but now I cannot unlock it to Unlocking lab machines is not intuitive
- Description updated (diff)
- Assignee deleted (
David Galloway)
Updated by David Galloway about 4 years ago
Are you sure smithi183 is the one that got locked by the original command?
If you're unlocking a machine that isn't locked by "you" then you need to add --owner foo like in the teuthology-lock --lock command.
I sort of agree this shouldn't be necessary (I'm sure there is a logical explanation) but I have a little helper for this.
dgalloway@p50 ~ ()$ cat ~/bin/tunlock
#!/bin/bash
teuthology-lock --unlock --owner $(teuthology-lock --brief $1 | awk '{ print $3 }') $1
Updated by Josh Durgin almost 4 years ago
The idea behind requiring the matching --owner is to avoid someone accidentally unlocking the wrong machine. It'd be nice if it used the same default owner as --lock though, so you would only need to specify --owner if you used --owner with --lock[-many].