| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-01-12 | |||
| 16:01:43 | mriedem | mnestratov: nevermind, i'll just update that myself | |
| 16:08:19 | mriedem | +2 on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/355805/ now | |
| 16:08:21 | mriedem | needs another core | |
| 16:14:18 | mriedem | dansmith: done on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/409890/ - created a bug for the map_cell0 thing | |
| 16:14:43 | dansmith | mriedem: ack thanks | |
| 16:15:34 | mriedem | dansmith: are you going to make https://review.openstack.org/#/c/416585/ depend on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/418141/ ? | |
| 16:15:35 | mriedem | it seems it has to | |
| 16:15:47 | mriedem | if you're busy i can make that change | |
| 16:16:41 | dansmith | mriedem: no, I was just hoping we'd merge the nova change and then poke sdague | |
| 16:16:47 | dansmith | but I can if you want | |
| 16:16:56 | sdague | what's up? | |
| 16:17:03 | mriedem | i think we should use the depends-on | |
| 16:17:06 | dansmith | okay | |
| 16:17:51 | dansmith | it doesn't get us any testing and probably isn't in danger of merging without us noticing, | |
| 16:17:52 | dansmith | but .. done | |
| 16:18:27 | dansmith | sdague: this is ready and blocked on the nova change that is required for us to merge it: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/416585/ | |
| 16:18:59 | dansmith | it has survived quite a bit of abuse thus far, so pretty confident :) | |
| 16:19:13 | mriedem | claudiub|2: unless you want to make a case for it, i'm going to defer https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/hyper-v-pci-passthrough to pike | |
| 16:19:14 | sdague | yeh, I had an old +2 on it | |
| 16:19:24 | sdague | how soon do we need a merge for it? | |
| 16:19:34 | mriedem | sdague: no rush i don't think | |
| 16:20:03 | mriedem | bauzas: i'm going to move https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/request-spec-use-by-compute to pike | |
| 16:20:10 | sdague | ok, mtreinish is on a plane to .au today, I'll see if other devstack folks pop up on it | |
| 16:20:22 | dansmith | mriedem: it's not like amazingly urgent, | |
| 16:20:26 | dansmith | but it certainly helps me get stuff done before I disappear | |
| 16:20:30 | claudiub|2 | mriedem: thati is what i'm currently testing at the moment. i'm setting up an environment for it, and i'll try to run the intel pci tempest tests | |
| 16:20:40 | mriedem | claudiub|2: ok, i'll hold off then | |
| 16:20:45 | mriedem | dansmith: ok | |
| 16:20:50 | mriedem | i think we could get it in by eod then | |
| 16:25:43 | cmartin | Hey could somebody unabandon this patch for me so I can work on it? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/342061/ | |
| 16:25:58 | mriedem | cmartin: done | |
| 16:26:08 | cmartin | mriedem: thanks | |
| 16:28:19 | openstackgerrit | Christopher Martin proposed openstack/nova: Stop using mox in unit/virt/disk/test_api.py https://review.openstack.org/342061 | |
| 16:30:02 | mriedem | sean-k-mooney: fyi that os-vif 1.4.0 breaks the nova unit tests, seen here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/418421/ : http://logs.openstack.org/21/418421/4/check/gate-cross-nova-python27-db-ubuntu-xenial/376a0f3/console.html#_2017-01-11_10_21_37_885392 | |
| 16:31:00 | mriedem | looks like 'vif_name': u'nicdc065497-3c' is new | |
| 16:32:30 | mriedem | this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/390225/ | |
| 16:34:31 | mriedem | hmmm, so the nova unit test is going to need to transform the object to it's known good version, which would be 1.0 | |
| 16:39:01 | mnestratov | mriedem: hi | |
| 16:39:32 | mnestratov | mriedem: sorry, just saw your message | |
| 16:40:03 | mriedem | np | |
| 16:42:50 | mnestratov | mriedem: thanks for fixing the review for us ) | |
| 16:47:01 | mdbooth | artom: It occurs to me that we don't call _build_device_metadata often enough | |
| 16:47:31 | mdbooth | We need to call it every time we regenerate libvirt domain xml, because all hw address will change every time we do that | |
| 16:52:52 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova: WIP: Make unit tests work with os-vif 1.4.0 https://review.openstack.org/419558 | |
| 16:52:55 | mriedem | dansmith: jaypipes: i've got a problem with ^ because of http://paste.openstack.org/show/594736/ | |
| 16:53:16 | mriedem | i'm backporting the VIFHostUser object to 1.0 but it's nested 'network' object isn't getting backported recursively | |
| 16:53:25 | mriedem | well, i think it's trying, but there is no rule for it | |
| 16:54:08 | mriedem | i do see this though https://github.com/openstack/os-vif/blob/1.4.0/os_vif/objects/network.py#L51 | |
| 16:55:08 | openstackgerrit | Davanum Srinivas (dims) proposed openstack/nova: [WIP][py35] Trying to get cinder+rally working https://review.openstack.org/419476 | |
| 16:57:39 | dtp | dansmith | |
| 16:58:48 | dansmith | dtp | |
| 16:59:10 | dansmith | mriedem: is it calling super in make compatible? | |
| 16:59:19 | mriedem | dansmith: yup | |
| 16:59:25 | dtp | do i understand your comment on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/418141 that instead of relying on the mapping being there, we need to rely instead on cells.enable setting? | |
| 16:59:29 | mriedem | looks like _obj_relationships_for doesn't have a manifest on the thing i'm backporting | |
| 16:59:34 | dansmith | mriedem: does the manifest call for the older version/ | |
| 17:00:01 | mriedem | where does the manifest get set on the object? | |
| 17:00:19 | mriedem | oh i see it doesn't have a manifest | |
| 17:00:29 | mriedem | so it tries to use the old school self.obj_relationships[field] | |
| 17:00:33 | dansmith | dtp: which comment? | |
| 17:00:35 | mriedem | and we don't have a rule for it | |
| 17:00:45 | dtp | dansmith the commit message at the top | |
| 17:00:46 | dansmith | mriedem: yeah, manifest is just passed into the call, not stored anywhere | |
| 17:01:38 | dansmith | dtp: we need to ignore the fact that the mapping is in place, if we're still on cellsv1, so that we don't bypass the replication and go straight to the cell database, which might have not-yet-replicated stuff in it | |
| 17:01:59 | dtp | ok, thank you | |
| 17:02:19 | mriedem | ok so i need to call obj_make_compatible_from_manifest() instead and provide my own manifest on how to handle this nested field? | |
| 17:02:23 | dansmith | dtp: cells.enable is really cellsv1.enable | |
| 17:02:42 | dtp | yeah i have that burned to my brain roms :D | |
| 17:02:47 | dtp | +1! | |
| 17:02:59 | dansmith | mriedem: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/unit/objects/test_objects.py#L886-L956 | |
| 17:03:14 | mdbooth | artom: Replied. | |
| 17:10:13 | edleafe | Can someone explain the failure here: http://logs.openstack.org/51/416751/6/check/gate-nova-tox-db-functional-ubuntu-xenial/fec7ddc/testr_results.html.gz | |
| 17:10:38 | edleafe | It seems all the tests passed, but the returncode was 1 | |
| 17:11:41 | mriedem | edleafe: this looks odd http://logs.openstack.org/51/416751/6/check/gate-nova-tox-db-functional-ubuntu-xenial/fec7ddc/console.html#_2017-01-12_15_25_20_540113 | |
| 17:11:47 | mriedem | 2017-01-12 15:25:20.506 4337 INFO nova.osapi_compute.wsgi.server [req-471b1e60-9717-479e-a053-06834d8fe63f fake fake - - -] (4337) wsgi exited, is_accepting=True | |
| 17:12:12 | jaypipes | mriedem: lookin... | |
| 17:13:31 | edleafe | mriedem: odd is a good word | |
| 17:18:30 | jaypipes | mriedem: ah, yeah... I ran into similar recently when trying to add a UUID field to the NUMACell object. Objects that had their versions changed but never got an obj_make_compatible() method run into this failure. To fix, you need to manually set the obj_relationships class attribute on the object in osvif :( | |
| 17:18:46 | mriedem | what's really crazy, | |
| 17:19:08 | mriedem | when this test was added to nova https://review.openstack.org/#/c/334048/11/nova/tests/unit/network/test_os_vif_util.py@575 | |
| 17:19:13 | jaypipes | mriedem: we aren't yet sending osvif objects over the wire, though, so it may be we could do a hack of the object manifests with dansmith's help? | |
| 17:19:31 | mriedem | it's setting the vif_name which passed even though vif_name wasn't a field on that type in os-vif 1.3.0 which is what we were testing against | |
| 17:19:51 | mriedem | so...i guess when the test converts it to a primitive, | |
| 17:19:59 | mriedem | because vif_name wasn't a 'registered' field it just excluded it? | |
| 17:20:05 | mriedem | so the equality check was ok? | |
| 17:20:50 | mriedem | if that's the case, i'm not sure why vif_name isn't showing up on the actual object when we do the compare with os-vif 1.4.0 http://logs.openstack.org/21/418421/4/check/gate-cross-nova-python27-db-ubuntu-xenial/376a0f3/console.html#_2017-01-11_10_21_37_885392 | |
| 17:21:34 | jaypipes | mriedem: vif_name is a field: https://github.com/openstack/os-vif/blob/master/os_vif/objects/vif.py#L65 | |
| 17:21:37 | mriedem | jaypipes: these have obj_make_compatible methods | |
| 17:21:43 | dansmith | jaypipes: obj_relationships should not be used anymore | |
| 17:21:48 | jaypipes | https://github.com/openstack/os-vif/blob/master/os_vif/objects/vif.py#L77 | |
| 17:21:53 | mriedem | jaypipes: vif_name wasn't a field in VIFHostUser until 1.1 | |
| 17:22:04 | jaypipes | dansmith: yeah, I know, but I found no other way to fix that bug. | |
| 17:22:05 | mriedem | and ^ was just released in os-vif 1.4.0 | |
| 17:22:07 | jaypipes | mriedem: ah.' | |
| 17:22:20 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/390225/7/os_vif/objects/vif.py | |
| 17:22:53 | jaypipes | mriedem: you sure about that? https://github.com/openstack/os-vif/commit/11af752a5af8a58a4f8fd5af196d1fce7729463d | |
| 17:22:59 | jaypipes | mriedem: shows added in 2015. | |
| 17:23:26 | mriedem | jaypipes: on which object? | |
| 17:23:34 | mriedem | we're not dealing with vif generic or bridge, | |
| 17:23:37 | mriedem | it's VIFHostUser | |