| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-cyborg - 2026-04-28 | |||
| 14:16:56 | chandankumar | Since it changes the output in openstack accelerator device attribute list | |
| 14:16:58 | sean-k-mooney | the upgrade impact of that shoudl be effectivly 0 | |
| 14:17:17 | chandankumar | will it need a release notes? and test coverage? | |
| 14:17:36 | sean-k-mooney | i default to yes in both cases | |
| 14:17:48 | chandankumar | ok good | |
| 14:17:48 | sean-k-mooney | it need at least unit test coverage | |
| 14:18:00 | chandankumar | PCI device lacks unit tests. | |
| 14:18:06 | sean-k-mooney | ... | |
| 14:18:06 | jgilaber | should we add that trait to all drivers? A quick search shows that other drivers seem to be missing it | |
| 14:18:09 | chandankumar | I need to take a look how much we have coverage | |
| 14:18:11 | jgilaber | https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aopenstack%2Fcyborg%20traits&type=code | |
| 14:18:21 | chandankumar | yes, | |
| 14:18:26 | sean-k-mooney | jgilaber: yes so i wonder if we want to track this as more then a bug | |
| 14:18:47 | chandankumar | it is currently available in FGPA, PCI, GPU only | |
| 14:18:55 | jgilaber | yes a specless blueprint might be a good fit I think | |
| 14:18:59 | sean-k-mooney | this is part of the "how do we model devices in placment" topic | |
| 14:19:19 | jgilaber | particularly if the testing needs significant work | |
| 14:19:49 | chandankumar | I will take a look at how much test coverage we have there for device spec and whitelist there is no coverage | |
| 14:19:59 | sean-k-mooney | i added some test when i fixed eliaer bugs in the pci driver by the way | |
| 14:20:05 | sean-k-mooney | as in unit tests | |
| 14:20:13 | sean-k-mooney | we will want to have tempest test for this later too | |
| 14:20:27 | chandankumar | https://github.com/openstack/cyborg/tree/master/cyborg/tests/unit/accelerator/drivers/pci/pci | |
| 14:20:47 | chandankumar | https://github.com/openstack/cyborg/blob/master/cyborg/tests/unit/accelerator/drivers/pci/pci/test_sysinfo.py | |
| 14:20:49 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/cyborg/blob/master/cyborg/tests/unit/accelerator/drivers/pci/pci/test_sysinfo.py | |
| 14:20:51 | chandankumar | it will the test voverage | |
| 14:21:09 | sean-k-mooney | ya so we have driver specific test although perhpas not where you expect them | |
| 14:21:28 | sean-k-mooney | so at the very lease we need unit test cover for this in the future functional and tempest test too | |
| 14:22:03 | chandankumar | regarding traits, there is some code duplication about constant names, May be I can clean it in the same patch | |
| 14:22:25 | sean-k-mooney | in general that better to do in a sperate patch | |
| 14:22:29 | chandankumar | ok | |
| 14:22:32 | sean-k-mooney | but it kind fo depends | |
| 14:22:37 | sean-k-mooney | on if we woudl abckprot this or not | |
| 14:22:39 | chandankumar | will do a follow up patch then | |
| 14:22:44 | sean-k-mooney | in my mind this is maser only | |
| 14:23:17 | sean-k-mooney | as a general rule you shoudl do code cleanup in a sepreate patch form bug or feature work | |
| 14:23:20 | chandankumar | as you said there is no upgrade impact, i think it is ok to backport | |
| 14:23:34 | sean-k-mooney | well there is | |
| 14:23:43 | sean-k-mooney | but its mitigated by how old that specific trait is | |
| 14:24:28 | chandankumar | https://github.com/openstack/cyborg/commit/5f896d2931d1a02e4beaf2cb4109a8a3e384b155 unifies pci management | |
| 14:24:41 | sean-k-mooney | if this trait was new this cycle we coudl nto backprot it to an older relase as an example | |
| 14:25:17 | sean-k-mooney | that not what you need to check in this case | |
| 14:25:19 | sean-k-mooney | its https://github.com/openstack/os-traits/blob/master/os_traits/owner/__init__.py | |
| 14:25:25 | sean-k-mooney | that was added 4 years ago | |
| 14:25:53 | sean-k-mooney | if it was new in 2026.2 you woudl have to check fi the standard trait exsitns in placment before reporting it | |
| 14:26:14 | sean-k-mooney | as we have to assuem placment could be at least 2 release older then cyborg | |
| 14:26:54 | sean-k-mooney | we also need to acont for the fact the cybrog compute agent can be up to 1 slrup older | |
| 14:27:23 | sean-k-mooney | in thei case we cant assume its newer then 2026.1 and we cant assume it has this backport | |
| 14:27:54 | chandankumar | ah in that case, I keep this to master only. | |
| 14:27:57 | sean-k-mooney | so when we translate teh device spec into a placment request group | |
| 14:28:09 | sean-k-mooney | we cant unconditonly assume its updated | |
| 14:28:12 | chandankumar | I did not consider these assumption | |
| 14:28:30 | sean-k-mooney | so this will need more work to make sure we dont break upgrades | |
| 14:28:39 | sean-k-mooney | the reporting of the triat is fine | |
| 14:28:56 | sean-k-mooney | the requesting of it need to check the compute-agent verion and gate it on the min version | |
| 14:29:06 | sean-k-mooney | or a config option | |
| 14:29:38 | sean-k-mooney | given we are not reprotign it today we must not be requesting it either | |
| 14:29:51 | sean-k-mooney | lets loop bakc to that in more detail on teh review or outside the meeting | |
| 14:29:59 | chandankumar | sure | |
| 14:30:29 | chandankumar | thank you sean-k-mooney! | |
| 14:30:40 | chandankumar | Since there is no more bugs, moving to open discussion | |
| 14:30:50 | chandankumar | #topic Open Discussion | |
| 14:31:22 | chandankumar | Feel free to bring topic here | |
| 14:32:41 | sean-k-mooney | i guess now is as good a time as any to say | |
| 14:32:59 | sean-k-mooney | i will be on pto friday and monday and im thinking of also taking next tuesday | |
| 14:33:12 | sean-k-mooney | so i may not be be here next week for the meeting | |
| 14:33:47 | chandankumar | sure, enjoy your time off! | |
| 14:33:50 | chandankumar | Moving to last one | |
| 14:34:05 | chandankumar | #topic volunteer to chair for next meeting | |
| 14:34:42 | chandankumar | Any volunteer up for chairing the next meeting? | |
| 14:34:50 | jgilaber | I can do it | |
| 14:34:58 | chandankumar | thank you jgilaber ! | |
| 14:35:14 | chandankumar | Now closing the meeting early, thank you all for attending! | |
| 14:35:18 | chandankumar | #endmeeting cyborg | |
| 14:35:18 | opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Apr 28 14:35:18 2026 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | |
| 14:35:18 | opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cyborg/2026/cyborg.2026-04-28-14.03.html | |
| 14:35:18 | opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cyborg/2026/cyborg.2026-04-28-14.03.txt | |
| 14:35:18 | opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cyborg/2026/cyborg.2026-04-28-14.03.log.html | |
| 14:36:44 | sean-k-mooney | chandankumar: jgilaber i dont know if we want to continue to discuss the upgrade condieration or not right now or if ye want to reflect on my comments | |
| 14:37:31 | sean-k-mooney | i think before we proceed with reproting the owner triat (that shoudl be safe) we need to do a deeper review of how that currently interact with t hegeenrat request groups in the arq | |
| 14:38:01 | sean-k-mooney | and look at the exact mechanis when we have up to n-2 compute-agent runnign with a fully upgraded api/conductor | |
| 14:38:49 | chandankumar | +1 to do a deep review on interaction with placement and cyborg on owner traits | |
| 14:39:10 | chandankumar | We might discover more bugs in that. | |
| 14:39:32 | sean-k-mooney | openstack --os-cloud devstack-admin resource provider trait list 45593a00-c178-3159-9687-6d7efa55f64d | |
| 14:39:34 | sean-k-mooney | +----------------------------+ | |
| 14:39:36 | sean-k-mooney | | name | | |
| 14:39:38 | sean-k-mooney | +----------------------------+ | |
| 14:39:40 | sean-k-mooney | | CUSTOM_PCI_INTEL | | |
| 14:39:41 | chandankumar | and then revisit this again in another meeting. | |
| 14:39:42 | sean-k-mooney | | CUSTOM_PCI_PRODUCT_ID_154C | | |
| 14:39:44 | sean-k-mooney | +----------------------------+ | |
| 14:39:46 | sean-k-mooney | i can confirm that the trait is indeed missing | |
| 14:40:09 | sean-k-mooney | so its not stricly a bug | |
| 14:40:19 | sean-k-mooney | the suprpot for this was part of a new spec | |
| 14:40:25 | sean-k-mooney | that was not fully impmented | |
| 14:40:44 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. owner traits were only intoduced a long time after cybrog was creted | |
| 14:41:01 | sean-k-mooney | as part fo a feature that spaned nova and cybrog that was never impmented on teh nova side | |
| 14:41:07 | sean-k-mooney | and only partly doen in cyborg | |
| 14:41:29 | sean-k-mooney | so im wondering if this shoudl really be a bug at all given it was orgially a feature qruieding a spec | |
| 14:41:44 | chandankumar | https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aopenstack%2Fnova-specs%20OWNER_CYBORG&type=code there are two specs | |
| 14:41:51 | sean-k-mooney | and given the nvova part was never done (its part of the nova spec for vgpus) | |