| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-cyborg - 2019-08-22 | |||
| 03:44:08 | xinranwang | so we should fill driver_name with 'intel' for example? | |
| 03:44:28 | xinranwang | if so, we can extract vendor name for driver_name.. | |
| 03:44:54 | Sundar | Yes, xinranwang. To summarize, I think we are agreeing to update the driver_name field in the deployable and use that as 'vendor name' to create the traits as per https://review.opendev.org/gitweb?p=openstack/cyborg-specs.git;f=specs/train/approved/cyborg-nova-placement.rst;hb=refs/changes/45/603545/7#l179 | |
| 03:45:02 | Sundar | Sounds good? | |
| 03:45:21 | Sundar | Then no need to add vendor_name to any object | |
| 03:45:44 | xinranwang | yes | |
| 03:46:56 | Sundar | Great. If others have objecttions, please LMK. Let's move on in the interest of time | |
| 03:47:04 | Sundar | #topic python cyborg client | |
| 03:47:44 | s_shogo | I'm working that with P5-P9 patch in advance. | |
| 03:48:12 | Sundar | Thanks, s_shogo. I am wondering if we have the time to update the cyborg client to v2 API? | |
| 03:48:28 | Coco_gao_ | So zhenghao's patch should use Vendor ID and then update deployable vendor name? | |
| 03:48:47 | Sundar | Coco_gao_: Yes | |
| 03:48:48 | Coco_gao_ | update to deployable table with vendor name | |
| 03:48:54 | Coco_gao_ | Sounds good. | |
| 03:49:21 | Sundar | It already has a driver name. At least today, driver name and vendor name are the same. | |
| 03:49:36 | Sundar | s_shogo: May be we need somebody to help you, for the client? | |
| 03:49:43 | s_shogo | Sundar : ok, I think so. I'll report the prospection for the v2 API Work in every IRC meeting. | |
| 03:50:12 | Sundar | s_shogo: Thanks a lot. Appreciate it. :) Please do ask if you need help. | |
| 03:50:49 | Sundar | BTW, TC has proposed: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/675317/ | |
| 03:50:50 | s_shogo | Sundar: Ok, Thanks. | |
| 03:51:25 | Sundar | They are proposing an intermediate release of the client. IMHO, it is useless because it is currently v1 based, has no Python 3 fixes and so nothing new from Stein release | |
| 03:51:47 | Sundar | We may as well club the client update with Train release. What do you al think? | |
| 03:53:47 | Sundar | Coco_gao_, wangzhh, xinranwang, shaohe_feng, Li_Liu, all: ^ | |
| 03:54:39 | Coco_gao_ | Agree if we have time. I don't know whether we can make that happen, are you optimistic about that? | |
| 03:54:51 | xinranwang | what's club mean.... | |
| 03:55:13 | Sundar | xinranwang: I mean combine client update with rest of Train release. | |
| 03:55:54 | Sundar | Coco_gao_: Yes, i share that concern. Once s_shogo lets us know if it can happen by Sep, we can decide. | |
| 03:56:25 | xinranwang | Yes, nice to have. | |
| 03:57:02 | Sundar | Yes, It will probably be lesser priority than Nova integ, Python 3, RBAC/security etc. Anybody thinks otherwise? | |
| 03:57:14 | Coco_gao_ | Agree. | |
| 03:57:33 | Sundar | #topic Other important Train tasks | |
| 03:57:48 | shaohe_feng | should the async bind in this release？ | |
| 03:58:04 | Sundar | wangzhh: Could you give us an update on RBAC, whenever you have the time? | |
| 03:58:21 | Sundar | shaohe_feng: Yes. It is needed for Nova integ | |
| 03:58:33 | xinranwang | I notice current code does not create deployable with driver_name, does it? Maybe need one patch on it? | |
| 03:58:41 | shaohe_feng | OK. | |
| 03:58:52 | Sundar | xinranwang: Yes, it is a gap | |
| 03:58:54 | shaohe_feng | Then we will add 2 more state for bind. | |
| 03:59:15 | shaohe_feng | ARQ_BIND_STARTED and ARQ_DELETING | |
| 03:59:23 | Sundar | BIND_STARTED is already being added in my patches | |
| 03:59:32 | Sundar | But I agree | |
| 03:59:33 | shaohe_feng | ARQ_INITIAL, ARQ_BIND_STARTED, ARQ_BOUND, ARQ_DELETING, ARQ_UNBOUND, ARQ_BIND_FAILED | |
| 03:59:59 | shaohe_feng | there will be 7 states | |
| 04:00:11 | shaohe_feng | Use “->” for transform , “X->” for can’t transform. | |
| 04:00:15 | shaohe_feng | TING X-> ARQ_BOUND | |
| 04:00:20 | shaohe_feng | ARQ_BIND_FAILED | |
| 04:00:26 | shaohe_feng | any comments on it? | |
| 04:00:28 | Sundar | Yes. Between bind and unbind, making bind async is more important. We don;t do much in unbind today | |
| 04:00:34 | xinranwang | Sundar: I can help on it. I will submit a patch by today to fix that. | |
| 04:00:53 | Sundar | xinranwan: Excellent. Thanks :) | |
| 04:00:56 | shaohe_feng | ^ Sundar Coco_gao_ xinranwang wangzhh Yumeng | |
| 04:01:09 | xinranwang | Sundar: np | |
| 04:01:10 | Sundar | shaohe_feng: I agree | |
| 04:01:10 | Coco_gao_ | We'd better merge the old patch P5-P9 first, and then discuss what are the states? | |
| 04:01:36 | Coco_gao_ | Maybe a new patch for states update? | |
| 04:02:17 | Sundar | I think shaohe_fend will propose a new patch for async un/bind | |
| 04:02:25 | Sundar | *shaohe_feng | |
| 04:02:31 | Coco_gao_ | That's good. | |
| 04:02:38 | Sundar | wangzhh: Can you please let us know about RBAC? | |
| 04:02:50 | xinranwang | btw, please review this https://review.opendev.org/#/c/677436/ when you got time :) | |
| 04:02:51 | shaohe_feng | Yes. After discussion, I should also implement the code. So I'm afraid there is no time left for me | |
| 04:02:54 | Coco_gao_ | maybe he is offline | |
| 04:03:08 | wangzhh | Test in my local env | |
| 04:03:13 | shaohe_feng | we should discuss it ASAP | |
| 04:03:31 | Coco_gao_ | you can arrange a meeting to discuss that. | |
| 04:03:41 | wangzhh | probably submit patch tomorrow | |
| 04:03:42 | shaohe_feng | any comments on the states transform above? | |
| 04:04:03 | Sundar | shaohe_feng: I agree with your states. I think they will suffice. Let's start with them and have people code review it? | |
| 04:04:05 | shaohe_feng | ^ Sundar Coco_gao_ xinranwang wangzhh Yumeng | |
| 04:04:37 | Sundar | I will also prioritize it for next week's IRC call | |
| 04:04:41 | Coco_gao_ | As good as my expectation, thank you. | |
| 04:05:03 | Sundar | Hopefully, P5-P9 patches would have merged by then :) | |
| 04:05:21 | Yumeng | shaohe_feng: no objections ^^ | |
| 04:05:30 | Coco_gao_ | Let's set a deadline for P5-P9 reviews? | |
| 04:05:30 | Sundar | #topic AoB | |
| 04:05:46 | Sundar | Coco_gao_: That would be welcome! | |
| 04:05:51 | wangzhh | shaohe no objections | |
| 04:06:07 | Coco_gao_ | So far so good. | |
| 04:06:17 | Yumeng | hey, btw, I would like to introduce you my colleague chenke, he will join us and contribute in cyborg. | |
| 04:06:21 | Sundar | What deadline do we want to set? | |
| 04:06:26 | shaohe_feng | so are you satisfy the state transform ? | |
| 04:06:33 | Coco_gao_ | end of this week? | |
| 04:06:44 | Coco_gao_ | including the weekend. | |
| 04:06:45 | Sundar | Welcome, chenke :) | |
| 04:06:51 | shaohe_feng | welcome cheke | |
| 04:06:58 | xinranwang | welcome chenke | |
| 04:06:59 | wangzhh | welcome | |
| 04:07:06 | s_shogo | welcome | |
| 04:07:06 | Coco_gao_ | I had already saw your patch, welcome chenke. | |
| 04:07:08 | Sundar | Coco_gao_: Sounds good to me. Others good with that? | |
| 04:07:09 | chenke | Hello everyone, I am new here, I hope to contribute to cyborg. | |
| 04:07:24 | shaohe_feng | sorry s/cheke/ chenke | |
| 04:07:30 | chenke | Thanks. | |
| 04:07:31 | Sundar | chenke, could you please tell us your backgrounnd or skill set? | |
| 04:07:39 | chenke | Ok. | |
| 04:07:42 | chenke | Previously, I mainly contributed to the watcher project. | |
| 04:08:26 | Sundar | Ok, sounds good | |
| 04:08:57 | chenke | I have been working on watcher for two years. Now is a core for watcher. | |
| 04:09:23 | Coco_gao_ | Sounds really good | |
| 04:09:29 | chenke | I am happy to contribute to cyborg. | |