| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-04-12 | |||
| 13:23:13 | bhagyashris | mriedem: ok, Thank you for info. | |
| 13:23:30 | sdague | frickler: is there any other concern about other consumers of this data? | |
| 13:24:10 | mordred | sdague: currently the field is meaningless, as it's always set to ipv6_dhcp no matter if that's what's happening or not - so other consumers cannot be making decisions based on it | |
| 13:24:37 | sdague | mordred: not this field, all the extra stuff going into the dhcp responses | |
| 13:24:44 | mordred | ah - gotcha | |
| 13:25:15 | mordred | that I can't say - I know it won't break glean - but I can't say if someone is doing some sort of strict schema based thing that might throw them if extra fields show up | |
| 13:25:32 | mordred | (I obviously think those folks are doing things wrong, but people do things wrong all the time) | |
| 13:26:01 | sdague | yeh, I'm more concerned that we've now got the 2 clocks problem where there is authoritative source, but we're back channeling it as well | |
| 13:26:17 | sdague | because it does seem like if the answer is use dhcp, then use it | |
| 13:26:33 | sdague | don't say use dhcp, and also here is all the info from dhcp in a different channel | |
| 13:31:37 | lyarwood | ildikov: are you working on the tests for jgriffith's cinderv3 detach change? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/438750/ ./me is losing track of who is working on this change. | |
| 13:33:53 | frickler | sdague: cloud-init should be fine looking at https://git.launchpad.net/cloud-init/tree/cloudinit/sources/helpers/openstack.py#n571 , but I agree we can be discussing that patch seperately from the others, so I'm going to do a bit of reshuffling | |
| 13:34:02 | sdague | frickler: ok, cool | |
| 13:34:25 | sdague | yeh, I want to get the type fixes in there, this is just a bigger issue about expanding the dhcp return | |
| 13:34:34 | lyarwood | mriedem: as the UCA devstack change looks like it *might* land is there any chance of another review of my QEMU LUKS spec ahead of the deadline tomorrow? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/437070 | |
| 13:34:37 | sdague | so lets get those type fixes first, land them, we can discuss the other thing | |
| 13:34:47 | mriedem | lyarwood: i plan on going through specs today | |
| 13:35:18 | lyarwood | mriedem: cool thanks | |
| 13:36:06 | mriedem | lyarwood: to be clear, my main concerns in there were the api | |
| 13:36:14 | sdague | mriedem: speaking of which, do you have final concerns before I pull the trigger on merging the UCA patch and us running libvirt 2.5 by default in the gate? | |
| 13:37:33 | lyarwood | mriedem: right, I removed the additional encryption provider constant and just left it up to the local nova-compute to decide which approach to use based on the available QEMU and Libvirt versions. | |
| 13:37:39 | ildikov | lyarwood: both of us are looking at it, like who has more bandwidth | |
| 13:38:36 | ildikov | lyarwood: I checked on the patch and fixed the nits, we might move some parts to follow up one if we cannot decide on it quickly | |
| 13:38:38 | lyarwood | ildikov: no problem, if you don't have time just let me know and I can take a look ahead of the meeting tomorrow. | |
| 13:39:55 | ildikov | lyarwood: sure, Tnx | |
| 13:43:00 | openstackgerrit | Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.live_migration_rollback notification https://review.openstack.org/402124 | |
| 13:43:39 | mriedem | sdague: i don't | |
| 13:43:42 | mriedem | i thought it was already done | |
| 13:59:25 | sdague | no, but I just pressed approve | |
| 13:59:28 | sdague | so soon | |
| 14:00:34 | frickler | mriedem: johnthetubaguy: btw. I think https://review.openstack.org/356335 should have had a reno as well. I spent some time searching to find out why our Newton cluster doesn't create libvirt.xml anymore after an update. | |
| 14:00:59 | openstackgerrit | Jens Rosenboom proposed openstack/nova master: Update network metadata type field for IPv6 https://review.openstack.org/450297 | |
| 14:01:05 | mriedem | frickler: i'm assuming that was an unintended side effect | |
| 14:01:15 | mriedem | frickler: we should definitely reno now though | |
| 14:01:18 | mriedem | for anyone upgrading | |
| 14:01:41 | mriedem | frickler: i see it was also backported to newton https://review.openstack.org/#/c/386676/ | |
| 14:01:47 | mriedem | frickler: would you like to work on a reno? | |
| 14:02:24 | frickler | mriedem: sure, I can do that. I assume it would be added to master and then backported? | |
| 14:02:59 | johnthetubaguy | frickler: +1 good call out | |
| 14:03:17 | openstackgerrit | Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez proposed openstack/nova master: Read Neutron port 'binding_profile' during boot https://review.openstack.org/449257 | |
| 14:03:45 | frickler | sdague: clarkb: mordred: so https://review.openstack.org/450297 is now just a single patch fixing the ipv6_dhcp type issue | |
| 14:05:18 | sdague | frickler: +2 | |
| 14:05:39 | frickler | btw. can anyone give that EMC ScaleIO CI a kick? | |
| 14:06:22 | sdague | the fact that it emails everyone about patches all the time | |
| 14:07:40 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Fix hypervisors api missing HostMappingNotFound handlers https://review.openstack.org/456227 | |
| 14:08:00 | frickler | sdague: it seems to do multiple NOT_REGISTERED votes per patch for some time now, yes | |
| 14:08:30 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Placement doing claims https://review.openstack.org/437424 | |
| 14:08:39 | mriedem | frickler: yeah | |
| 14:08:57 | openstackgerrit | Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.live_migration_rollback notification https://review.openstack.org/402124 | |
| 14:09:07 | mriedem | emc scaleio is xyang1's team i think | |
| 14:09:38 | sdague | frickler: yeh, it's just massively misconfigured I think | |
| 14:09:44 | mriedem | well, | |
| 14:09:45 | xyang1 | mriedem: hi | |
| 14:09:51 | mriedem | it also relies on something that isn't merged yet | |
| 14:10:06 | mriedem | xyang1: can we get the emc scaleio ci in nova just restricted to the one patch that it cares about? | |
| 14:10:17 | mriedem | this one https://review.openstack.org/#/c/407440/ | |
| 14:10:24 | mriedem | xyang1: it shows up as NOT_REGISTERED for all nova patches | |
| 14:11:08 | xyang1 | mriedem: oh, the nova CI. I think our CI team is still working on it. It is not working properly yet | |
| 14:11:31 | xyang1 | mriedem: I'll ask them to turn it off for now | |
| 14:11:36 | mriedem | ok, but it really won't work on anything except https://review.openstack.org/#/c/407440/ yet, | |
| 14:11:42 | mriedem | and probably not even that given the state it is in | |
| 14:11:46 | mriedem | xyang1: great thanks | |
| 14:11:52 | sdague | xyang1: they should also configure it to not email | |
| 14:12:09 | sdague | it's sending emails to all patch submissions | |
| 14:12:16 | mriedem | i didn't notice the email, those are all filtered for me | |
| 14:12:27 | xyang1 | mriedem: sdague noted. Will fix it | |
| 14:12:35 | sdague | xyang1: thank you | |
| 14:12:45 | xyang1 | sdague: np | |
| 14:14:51 | sfinucan | frickler: I assume the other two patches can be abandoned now? | |
| 14:16:04 | frickler | sfinucan: I think I still want to move on with them, but I'll wait with the rebase until the other is finished, so i'll -W for now | |
| 14:16:25 | sfinucan | (y) | |
| 14:26:44 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1675791 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Instance created by demo user(non-admin), shelved by admin and unshelved by demo user --> ends up in error state " [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Nikolai Korablin (nkorabli) | |
| 14:26:44 | nkorabli | Hi there! I am working on this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1675791 | |
| 14:26:46 | mriedem | nkorabli: so you want to write a functional test to recreate https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1675791 ? | |
| 14:27:21 | mriedem | nkorabli: you should be able to do that in the functional test tree, we have an admin and non-admin user | |
| 14:28:05 | nkorabli | Alright! But, as i remember - you said it is better to fix the bug and then to write a test? | |
| 14:28:20 | mriedem | nkorabli: well, you could write the test that shows the bug first | |
| 14:28:28 | mriedem | see nova/tests/functional/regressions | |
| 14:28:53 | mriedem | although i'm not totally sure if our glance fixture would handle this | |
| 14:29:23 | mriedem | the case where it fails is the admin shelves the instance so they own the snapshot right? and the user tries to unshelve the instance but glance fails since they don't have visibility to the image | |
| 14:29:25 | mriedem | it's a 404 or something | |
| 14:29:46 | mriedem | we use a glance fixture for this in nova functional tests, and i very much doubt it tracks ownership for an image | |
| 14:29:52 | nkorabli | Correct | |
| 14:30:03 | mriedem | not that we couldn't update the fixture | |
| 14:30:09 | mriedem | you could also do this with a tempest test | |
| 14:30:27 | mriedem | tempest is probably easier | |
| 14:31:10 | nkorabli | So, fixture is kind of abstraction, that not reproduces 100% functionality? | |
| 14:31:16 | mriedem | correct | |
| 14:31:29 | mriedem | nova functional tests don't talk to a real live glance service | |
| 14:31:34 | mriedem | the fixture is basically a stub | |
| 14:31:45 | mriedem | it has some state and logic, but it's not th real thing | |
| 14:32:05 | nkorabli | I see! | |
| 14:33:31 | mriedem | nkorabli: if i remember correctly you were going to ask about this scenario in the mailing list too right? | |
| 14:33:33 | mriedem | did that happen? | |
| 14:34:03 | nkorabli | Just wondering how complicated is it to add this kind of functionality that I need? Is it possible to make in couple of days? Maybe it won't worth it if it's more than that | |
| 14:34:29 | mriedem | it would be relatively easy to write a test for the recreate in tempest | |
| 14:34:34 | mriedem | more so than nova functional tests | |
| 14:34:59 | mriedem | see http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/tempest/tree/tempest/api/compute/servers/test_server_actions.py#n504 | |
| 14:35:01 | mriedem | for an example | |
| 14:35:13 | mriedem | you could have to write a test mostly like that, except the shelve happens by the admin client | |