| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-cyborg - 2026-09-01 | |||
| 14:10:16 | sean-k-mooney | same for nvme | |
| 14:10:34 | sean-k-mooney | but after this week we will defer all feature to next cycle | |
| 14:10:50 | sean-k-mooney | im not sure we will have time for either to compelte review this week but we will see | |
| 14:11:18 | jgilaber | +1, I'll try to review both series during the week | |
| 14:11:22 | sean-k-mooney | so for the cycel highliht i woudl like to prepare a draft fo them this week or monday at the latest | |
| 14:11:33 | sean-k-mooney | saem for the release note prelude | |
| 14:12:02 | chandankumar | I will be sharing the nvme hardware testing result tomorrow . But I am not sure about merge. | |
| 14:12:07 | sean-k-mooney | ideally we willhave drafts fo both ready by friday and we can review the status in the next meeting | |
| 14:12:30 | rlandy | #action cycle highlights and release prelude needed | |
| 14:13:24 | sean-k-mooney | if i dont see either by tursday ill create them but if ohter have time to start them thats fine too | |
| 14:14:02 | rlandy | anything more on FF items and RC1 items required? | |
| 14:14:21 | sean-k-mooney | i think we can move on | |
| 14:14:57 | sean-k-mooney | there are a few small change we may do after rc1 is cut | |
| 14:14:57 | rlandy | ok ... | |
| 14:15:04 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. some packagign cleanup | |
| 14:15:12 | sean-k-mooney | but we can look at that next week or the week after | |
| 14:15:32 | rlandy | noted - to add to next meeting's agenda | |
| 14:15:52 | rlandy | Any other topics to raise? | |
| 14:17:10 | rlandy | ok - moving on ... let's take a look at reviews | |
| 14:17:17 | rlandy | #topic: Reviews | |
| 14:17:35 | rlandy | #link: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cyborg-2026.2-status | |
| 14:18:10 | rlandy | any open feature reviews ^^ to highlight? | |
| 14:18:49 | gamio_ | #link: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg/+/1003061 bugfix for 2163799, would appreciate a core look | |
| 14:19:12 | gamio_ | I can also help review the nvme series this week if that's useful | |
| 14:19:18 | rlandy | noted comment by chandankumar on nvme hardware testing results shortly | |
| 14:20:05 | sean-k-mooney | ill add https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg/+/1003061 to my list | |
| 14:20:22 | gamio_ | thanks | |
| 14:22:09 | rlandy | doc series last three patches are rebased one on another as requested: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg/+/1001774 ,https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg/+/1001767, https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg/+/1001779. Thanks sean-k-mooney for initial reviews | |
| 14:22:55 | rlandy | any other reviews to raise? | |
| 14:23:36 | sean-k-mooney | https://storage.gra.cloud.ovh.net/v1/AUTH_dcaab5e32b234d56b626f72581e3644c/zuul_opendev_logs_34b/openstack/34b088d98d954c6fafe206b4a1fdd06d/docs/ looks a lot better as does https://storage.gra.cloud.ovh.net/v1/AUTH_dcaab5e32b234d56b626f72581e3644c/zuul_opendev_logs_34b/openstack/34b088d98d954c6fafe206b4a1fdd06d/docs/install/index.html | |
| 14:23:50 | sean-k-mooney | we can likely land those this week | |
| 14:24:00 | sean-k-mooney | we will probaly postpone the other docs enahcnement to next cycle | |
| 14:24:08 | rlandy | +1 | |
| 14:24:36 | rlandy | last call for reviews to raise | |
| 14:26:01 | rlandy | k ...moving on to bugs | |
| 14:26:09 | rlandy | #topic: Bugs | |
| 14:26:15 | rlandy | #link: https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-cyborg | |
| 14:26:37 | rlandy | one bug in New state: | |
| 14:26:44 | rlandy | #link: https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-cyborg/+bug/2165432 | |
| 14:26:52 | rlandy | melwitt, looks like you reported this one | |
| 14:27:25 | melwitt | yes, this fell from some smartnic testing I did last week with the generic pci driver | |
| 14:27:34 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: is that a bug or feature | |
| 14:28:03 | sean-k-mooney | the phsyical_network is not docuemented as beign expected to wrok correct | |
| 14:28:06 | melwitt | so it could be debatable whether it is a bug | |
| 14:28:08 | sean-k-mooney | i feel like we shoudl supprot that | |
| 14:28:22 | sean-k-mooney | so im thinkign its a wishlist RFE bug | |
| 14:28:33 | sean-k-mooney | or specless blueprint | |
| 14:28:34 | melwitt | not sure how detailed the documentation is but I should look | |
| 14:28:39 | sean-k-mooney | not somthign that need heavy tracking | |
| 14:28:52 | sean-k-mooney | its more or less absent | |
| 14:29:02 | sean-k-mooney | i dont think thye generic driver was intended to suprpot smarnics | |
| 14:29:09 | sean-k-mooney | hwoever i also dont see a reason not too | |
| 14:29:32 | sean-k-mooney | and it woudl allow use to eventually remvoe the special nic drivers | |
| 14:29:32 | melwitt | yeah. it appears it would not take that much to make the pci driver support them | |
| 14:29:55 | sean-k-mooney | so i woudl be oke with addign the rfe tag and markign this as whishlist | |
| 14:30:01 | sean-k-mooney | but we proably woudl not backprot this | |
| 14:30:17 | melwitt | sounds ok to me | |
| 14:30:30 | sean-k-mooney | does that owrk for others | |
| 14:30:52 | jgilaber | +1 | |
| 14:31:13 | sean-k-mooney | as a general topic im debating which fo spec, bluepirnt and rfe bug we want to use for cybrog in general | |
| 14:31:39 | sean-k-mooney | i think for small things like this i woudl prefer to have wishlist rfe bugs if its small rahter then specless bluerpints | |
| 14:31:57 | sean-k-mooney | but we can dicuss that later unless folks haven an imideate reaction/prefence | |
| 14:32:34 | melwitt | I like specless blueprints personally but am not vehement about it | |
| 14:32:57 | sean-k-mooney | neutron starts alls feature enhacment as an RFE bug and graduates to bluepritn or specs if it need more trackign or discussion | |
| 14:33:36 | gamio_ | as a newer contributor, the rfe bug flow worked well for 2161354. no spec needed and low friction | |
| 14:34:00 | sean-k-mooney | i guess for nwo we can triage things in the meeting as they come up | |
| 14:34:10 | sean-k-mooney | adn we can write down our perfered flow next cycle | |
| 14:36:04 | sean-k-mooney | ok for now i have updated https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-cyborg/+bug/2165432 | |
| 14:36:11 | sean-k-mooney | anythin esle we want ot discuss on that | |
| 14:36:22 | rlandy | all set on this topic, melwitt? | |
| 14:36:51 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: is this somethign you want to adress for rc1 or 2027.1 | |
| 14:37:05 | melwitt | yes all good. I was thinking 2027.1 | |
| 14:37:13 | sean-k-mooney | i assumed the latter ya | |
| 14:37:28 | rlandy | k ... moving on ... | |
| 14:37:33 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/cyborg master: Improve installation guide index https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg/+/1001774 | |
| 14:37:44 | sean-k-mooney | i want to add nic emualtion to the pci-sim next cycel adn we can discuss testing this with that later | |
| 14:38:02 | rlandy | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-cyborgclient | |
| 14:38:07 | rlandy | looks all triaged here | |
| 14:38:28 | rlandy | so let's move on to the open discussion | |
| 14:38:37 | rlandy | #topic open discussion | |
| 14:38:48 | rlandy | anything else to bring up today? | |
| 14:39:25 | melwitt | just wanted to share that I proposed a spec for 2027.1 for adding a services table and versioning and heartbeats etc if anyone might be interested https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg-specs/+/1001999 | |
| 14:39:25 | sean-k-mooney | i guess a minor admin thing | |
| 14:39:45 | sean-k-mooney | ah let start with your topic | |
| 14:40:00 | sean-k-mooney | ya i will hopfely look at that next week | |
| 14:40:30 | sean-k-mooney | i think my main feedback before was | |
| 14:40:49 | sean-k-mooney | if we supprot healtchecsk at all i woudl prefer to supprot the per binday helathchecks | |
| 14:41:02 | sean-k-mooney | like was propsoed for nova/manilla | |
| 14:41:45 | melwitt | not a ton to say about it but that I'm thinking of it as a first step toward being able to support rolling upgrades which I think we need for production readiness | |
| 14:41:53 | sean-k-mooney | the services api i thnk makes sesne but not sure about forced down | |
| 14:42:34 | melwitt | yes i remember :) per process healthchecks. I was thinking that would not be part of this particular spec work but would be a thing to add separately | |
| 14:42:35 | sean-k-mooney | ya so i think that is what we shoudl use it for | |
| 14:42:49 | sean-k-mooney | i dont think the service api shoudl really be a monitoring api | |
| 14:42:58 | sean-k-mooney | it can report state | |
| 14:43:07 | sean-k-mooney | but i think its value is for rolling upgrdes | |
| 14:43:07 | melwitt | same, I am personally thinking we will not have forced down but wanted to put it out there for discussion in case others have thoughts | |
| 14:43:29 | sean-k-mooney | im not actully sure we even need state/staus | |
| 14:43:36 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. if its up | |
| 14:43:53 | sean-k-mooney | we may but if we had per service healthcheck endpoint its not stricly needed | |
| 14:44:11 | melwitt | really? I was thinking it would be nice to know when/if each agent reported in | |