| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-cyborg - 2026-09-14 | |||
| 16:13:07 | sean-k-mooney | basiclly we shoudd more or less do this like we would for neutron sriov ports | |
| 16:13:18 | sean-k-mooney | currenly we do that filtering after the placement call | |
| 16:13:23 | sean-k-mooney | but ideally we woudl do it before hand | |
| 16:13:38 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. we do it via the pci filter today for neutron | |
| 16:15:21 | sean-k-mooney | in nova our vifi object have a type filed and a network field https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/network/model.py#L427-L428 | |
| 16:16:14 | sean-k-mooney | but im not sure we currently recored the phsynet in the network | |
| 16:16:29 | sean-k-mooney | so we may have to look that up directly form neutron | |
| 16:16:44 | sean-k-mooney | or plumb that inf though the modeles | |
| 16:16:56 | sean-k-mooney | this is the bit i didnt want to look up on firday :) | |
| 16:18:14 | sean-k-mooney | we have some exsting code we can draw form like https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/network/neutron.py#L2183-L2224 | |
| 16:18:48 | sean-k-mooney | for example in create_resouces_requsts https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/network/neutron.py#L2356 | |
| 16:19:23 | sean-k-mooney | infact that is also wehre we are creating the cyborg requests | |
| 16:19:27 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/network/neutron.py#L2356-L2373 | |
| 16:20:52 | melwitt | hm ok, so nova should be using the key to request a trait rather | |
| 16:21:01 | sean-k-mooney | unless im missing somehting we are looking up the phsynet and nerver actully passing it | |
| 16:21:12 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: yes | |
| 16:21:24 | melwitt | that is what I saw as well, looking it up but then doing nothing with it | |
| 16:21:27 | sean-k-mooney | because the device profile is the same regardless fo the network | |
| 16:21:46 | sean-k-mooney | but hte phsynet depend on the network and or l2 segment | |
| 16:22:12 | melwitt | ok I will update the nova bug with this info | |
| 16:27:01 | sean-k-mooney | ah... https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/network/neutron.py#L2417-L2422 | |
| 16:27:04 | melwitt | ok yeah I see now, I had misread the spec | |
| 16:27:26 | sean-k-mooney | so right now stpehens piror chagnes are findign a host aht has the requried phnets | |
| 16:27:45 | sean-k-mooney | but when they added the cybrog feature the didnt do it on a per nic basis | |
| 16:28:04 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. then never enriched the requried traits for the cyborg request group | |
| 16:28:29 | sean-k-mooney | so if your host only has 1 phsynet this will owrk but if it has 2 then you might get a device on the wrong one form placement | |
| 16:28:38 | melwitt | does that mean anything needst o change about the code you linked with the physnets? or would the cyborg change be an additive change | |
| 16:28:41 | sean-k-mooney | that will then fail at the port bidning stage in neutron | |
| 16:28:53 | sean-k-mooney | no the code shoudl still be changed | |
| 16:29:20 | melwitt | I mean, does _that_ code need to change? with cyborg, is it bad to add the physnet to the set the way it is currently? | |
| 16:29:45 | sean-k-mooney | those are 2 diffent api responces | |
| 16:29:53 | sean-k-mooney | it is correct to add it to the attachment handel | |
| 16:30:07 | sean-k-mooney | but https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/network/neutron.py#L2367-L2376 is the imporant part we need to check | |
| 16:30:20 | sean-k-mooney | we are gettign the reqeust form the device profile | |
| 16:30:28 | melwitt | oh ok, so the if physnet: physnets.add(physnet) can stay as-is even when we fix the cyborg part | |
| 16:30:28 | sean-k-mooney | the device profile shoudl not have the phsynet | |
| 16:30:35 | sean-k-mooney | right | |
| 16:30:40 | melwitt | ok that's good | |
| 16:30:48 | sean-k-mooney | that for neutron sriov port | |
| 16:30:51 | sean-k-mooney | so that bit is fine | |
| 17:02:01 | sean-k-mooney | sorry was distracted with nova irc meeting as you probaly saw | |
| 18:13:49 | melwitt | yes np | |
| #openstack-cyborg - 2026-09-15 | |||
| 12:00:35 | opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/cyborg-specs master: Repropose generic nvme driver secure cleanup spec for 2027.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg-specs/+/1005716 | |
| 12:04:16 | opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/cyborg-specs master: Repropose generic nvme driver secure cleanup spec for 2027.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg-specs/+/1005716 | |
| 13:02:30 | opendevreview | Joan Gilabert proposed openstack/cyborg-specs master: Repropose generic mdev driver spec for 2026.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg-specs/+/1005068 | |
| 13:21:37 | opendevreview | Joan Gilabert proposed openstack/cyborg-specs master: Repropose generic mdev driver spec for 2027.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg-specs/+/1005068 | |
| 13:44:40 | opendevreview | Joan Gilabert proposed openstack/cyborg-specs master: Repropose generic mdev driver spec for 2027.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg-specs/+/1005068 | |
| 13:47:24 | opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/cyborg-specs master: Repropose NVMe secure cleanup spec for 2027.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg-specs/+/1005716 | |
| 14:02:19 | opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'cyborg' | |
| 14:02:19 | opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | |
| 14:02:19 | opendevmeet | Meeting started Tue Sep 15 14:02:19 2026 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is jgilaber. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | |
| 14:02:19 | jgilaber | #startmeeting cyborg | |
| 14:02:25 | jgilaber | Hi! Who is around today? | |
| 14:02:33 | gamio | o/ | |
| 14:02:37 | chandankumar | o/ | |
| 14:02:41 | morenod | o/ | |
| 14:02:42 | sean-k-mooney | o/ | |
| 14:02:59 | jgilaber | while we gather, feel free to add your topics to the agenda https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openstack-cyborg-irc-meeting#L49 | |
| 14:03:04 | melwitt | o/ | |
| 14:03:13 | rlandy | o/ | |
| 14:03:25 | jgilaber | courtesy ping: amoralej bogdando skovili | |
| 14:03:46 | amoralej | sorry, in another mtg, i will have limited atention | |
| 14:03:59 | jgilaber | ack amoralej | |
| 14:04:20 | jgilaber | let's start with the first and only topic for now | |
| 14:04:27 | jgilaber | #topic PTG Planning | |
| 14:04:36 | jgilaber | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cyborg-2027.1-ptg | |
| 14:05:07 | jgilaber | we have a ptg etherpad already | |
| 14:05:17 | jgilaber | feel free to add topics for discussion there | |
| 14:05:29 | sean-k-mooney | so looking at the aviablity | |
| 14:05:39 | sean-k-mooney | it looks like we shoudl avoid monday | |
| 14:05:46 | sean-k-mooney | the 12th | |
| 14:06:57 | sean-k-mooney | i think that means we will put most of our session on tuseday the 13th | |
| 14:07:15 | sean-k-mooney | do we think a 4-5 hour block is enough | |
| 14:07:22 | jgilaber | if we can fit all in one day it would be good | |
| 14:07:38 | jgilaber | it would help to avoid conflicts with oter projects (mostly watcher and nova I think) | |
| 14:08:03 | jgilaber | unless we have a lot more topics I think 4-5 h sould be enough | |
| 14:08:03 | sean-k-mooney | i was we can have 4 hours on tuseday + hour hour nova cross project session | |
| 14:08:23 | sean-k-mooney | and maybe a 1 hour session later in the week if needed | |
| 14:09:07 | jgilaber | sounds good to me | |
| 14:09:19 | sean-k-mooney | so ya woudl 1 day on tuesday the 12 th 4-5 hours total work for folks in with a 13:00 utc start? | |
| 14:10:01 | sean-k-mooney | im thinking of asking nova ot have the nova-cybrog cross project first at 13:00 utc | |
| 14:10:23 | sean-k-mooney | then our dedicated session would happen in the 4 hour block after | |
| 14:10:37 | sean-k-mooney | with at least 1 perhaps 2 breaks | |
| 14:11:53 | sean-k-mooney | if there are no comments ill update that ptg etherpad with that as a draft plan | |
| 14:11:58 | sean-k-mooney | and reach out to rene | |
| 14:12:00 | jgilaber | +1 from me, any objection to the proposal? | |
| 14:12:30 | chandankumar | nope, +1 | |
| 14:13:07 | sean-k-mooney | ok we can see what topic we have, but i think we wont have as many this cycle as last cycle | |
| 14:14:37 | jgilaber | ack, thanks | |
| 14:15:00 | jgilaber | anything else for PTG planning? | |
| 14:16:20 | jgilaber | ok, moving on | |
| 14:16:24 | jgilaber | #topic Reviews | |
| 14:16:43 | jgilaber | we don't have any review in the agenda, is there any patch to highlight from anybody? | |
| 14:16:50 | jgilaber | otherwise we can move to bug triage | |
| 14:17:46 | jgilaber | #topic Bugs | |
| 14:17:53 | jgilaber | we have one new bug | |
| 14:17:56 | jgilaber | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-cyborg/+bug/2167145 | |
| 14:18:50 | melwitt | this one was opened by me from one of sean's comments on the NIC SR-IOV support in the generic PCI driver spec review | |
| 14:19:24 | sean-k-mooney | ya its generic to more or less all our whitelist/devspec options | |
| 14:19:28 | jgilaber | the bug seems valid to me | |