05-10-2018 10:45 AM - edited 03-20-2019 10:08 PM
Hi,
I have seen a similar issue ( not exactly the same ) with one of our customers who is running on .3.2(2d) version, is that an affected version too?
05-11-2018 05:55 AM
What version of ESXi is affected? Is it all versions or just a specific version?
05-14-2018 10:12 AM
Hi,
It was 6.0U2 , several of his hosts went down.
05-15-2018 08:04 AM
Hello,
Any Operating System could be impacted by this issue.
Thank you,
Andrew
05-15-2018 10:25 AM
Are there any non-VMware OSes reported to have had the issue? I get the issue is driver-firmware related and that any OS is possibly affected, but have there been any reports of the issue with Microsoft or Linux operating systems so far?
05-11-2018 02:17 PM - edited 05-15-2018 08:08 AM
Hello Uday,
CSCvj32984 only impacts VIC 13xx running adapter firmware 4.2(3a). This firmware is part of the 3.2(3a) and 3.2(3b) UCSM Blade and Rack bundles. The 4.2(3a) adapter firmware was also included in the 3.1(3a) and 3.1(3b) Standalone M5 Racks bundles.
It is possible to see some of these same symptoms, such as some type of aborts in ESXi logs, with a different root cause. Open a TAC case and attach the UCS and Operating System logs so we can take a closer look.
Thank you,
Andrew
05-14-2018 01:39 PM - edited 05-14-2018 01:40 PM
If we upgrade to 3.2(3a) but exclude the adapter firmware, we shouldn't see this issue manifest, correct? We'd like to get the 3.2(3a) BIOS loaded for the Spectre microcode update, but don't want to introduce an FC issue at the same time.
05-15-2018 08:03 AM
Hello,
The recommendation would be to upgrade the entire blade or rack server to an earlier release that is not exposed to CSCvj32984 but still has the Spectre fixes.
For instance, the 3.2(2f) release includes the Spectre fixes and is not exposed to CSCvj32984.
Check this out for more info on Spectre:
Thank you,
Andrew
05-15-2018 08:29 AM
Just to confirm, if we're running 3.2(3a) at an infrastructure level, we can run 3.2(2f) on the blades and be OK.
That sounds a like a perfectly fine plan, but I just wanted to make sure this was the case.
05-15-2018 08:35 AM
Hello,
Yes - with UCS Infrastructure running 3.2(3a) the blades are still supported on 3.2(2f).
Cross firmware compatibility info is always documented in the release notes. Here is the link to the section within the 3.2 UCS Manager Release Notes:
Thank you,
Andrew
10-23-2018 09:23 AM
@Andrew Kelly we just experienced this bug last week and had multiple ESXi 6.0U3 hosts hang so hard that we had to force power cycle them. VIC firmware was already at 4.2(3b) BUT the FIs and IOMs were only at 3.2(2b). Do you think we experienced the bug because the full UCS stack was not up to at least 3.2(3d)?
10-23-2018 09:42 AM
Hello,
Once the VIC is updated you are no longer exposed to CSCvj32984. This is because the firmware fix for the defect is included in the VIC firmware. There is no change to the FI or IOM infrastructure components.
I would gather logs and reach out to Cisco TAC and VMware to analyze the hang experienced.
Thank you,
Andrew
10-24-2018 06:38 AM
Thanks. We do have a TAC case open as well as a case with Dell/EMC and they have analyzed the logs and of course the finger pointing has commenced. The original poster mentioned having the same issue even on 3.2(3d) which was the same for us. Everything in the logs looks very similar to this bug. It may not be the same thing but it's very close.
I will say this too: we upgraded another Dell SC 8000 array a few weeks prior and had no issues. They were still UCS blades attached via fibre channel BUT they were using VIC 1240s. The only stack we've seen this problem with was fibre channel on VIC 1340's even on the proper firmware.
05-23-2018 11:03 AM
Hi Andrew,
We are still using the older firmware version for our customers on the FC Adapter 1340. Are firmware versions 1.6.0.36 and 2.3.0.14 impacted by issue discussed in ticket CSCvj32984? Our company have released UCS bundle version 3.2(3a) to our customers for the spectre/meltdown fixed but DO NOT upgrade the VIC 1340 firmware, meaning stay at FW version 1.6.0.36 and 2.3.0.14. Can you please give me your comment regarding to the scenario we have. Thanks.
Regards,
-Clint
05-15-2018 11:29 AM
What fnic drivers were they using?
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide