Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-07-13
15:43:10 sean-k-mooney jangutter: for the sriov type you should call your plugins plug method with a VIFHostDevice and for the virtio forworder case you should use VIFVHostUser with a costom port profile if you need to pass vendor specific info.
15:43:54 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: api-ref: Add parameters in cold migrate action https://review.openstack.org/410042
15:44:01 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: api-ref: Add parameters in cold migrate action https://review.openstack.org/410042
15:45:22 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Add functional tests for cold migration to same host https://review.openstack.org/414926
15:45:31 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Add functional tests for cold migration to same host https://review.openstack.org/414926
15:48:17 openstackgerrit Alex Szarka proposed openstack/nova master: Transform the transformed notifications functional tests https://review.openstack.org/483448
15:48:27 sean-k-mooney jangutter: was your question more how do i tell nova to allocate the vf and call the plugin?
15:49:16 sean-k-mooney jangutter: without a review too look at its a little hard to advise what do next
15:52:31 openstackgerrit Alex Szarka proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.exists notification https://review.openstack.org/403660
15:52:50 openstackgerrit Alex Szarka proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.resize.error notifications https://review.openstack.org/417882
15:53:09 mriedem jaypipes: dansmith: can one of you put the priority reviews docs patch through https://review.openstack.org/#/c/470420/
15:53:45 dansmith sure
15:53:58 jangutter sean-k-mooney: your wish is my command, just as we speak the clearance came through.
15:54:52 jangutter So my next newbie question to the room is: should I throw away the old reviews and create new ones, or replace them? what's the status quo?
15:55:52 mriedem dansmith: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/445142/ also needs a rebase
15:56:29 dansmith mriedem: ac
15:56:30 dansmith k
15:56:31 sean-k-mooney jangutter: cool. am it really up to you. you can keep the change ids if the new code is a nautal evolution of the previous patches or abandon the old patchs and leave a link to the new patchset if its substially different
15:57:38 jaypipes jangutter: just Abandon the old patches.
15:57:45 jaypipes jangutter: patches are cheap :)
15:58:27 jangutter *sniff* they're going to data heaven now.
15:59:06 sean-k-mooney jangutter: openstack never delete the review so they will live forever in bit rot land
15:59:32 jangutter *sniff* they're going to data purgatory now.
16:01:21 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Document Pike release review priorities https://review.openstack.org/470420
16:01:36 sean-k-mooney jangutter: jaypipes apparently this is the oldest review still visable https://review.openstack.org/#/c/131 jay you were a core on keystone once?
16:03:15 breton lol. Even Dolph was not a core.
16:03:31 openstackgerrit Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez proposed openstack/nova master: Add datapath type information to OVS vif objects https://review.openstack.org/474892
16:03:54 jaypipes sean-k-mooney: lol
16:07:46 sean-k-mooney jangutter: am when you push the new patches add me to them and ill take a look at what you have end to end
16:12:47 jaypipes jangutter: yes, purgatory is more appropriate for the patches that I personally abandon (there have been many, many of them)
16:13:04 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: List/show all server migration types (2/2) https://review.openstack.org/459483
16:15:29 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Microversion 2.52 - List/Show all server migration types https://review.openstack.org/430839
16:16:00 openstackgerrit Jan Gutter proposed openstack/nova master: Netronome SmartNIC Enablement https://review.openstack.org/483459
16:17:16 jangutter Warning: these patches have been ripped from the Netronomicon.
16:17:47 openstackgerrit Alex Szarka proposed openstack/nova master: Refactor create_delete_server_with_instance_update https://review.openstack.org/466296
16:20:52 jangutter jaypipes, sean-k-mooney: thanks very much for the infinite patience. The ML2/OS-VIF external plugin's on github, and I'll upload the neutron bits in an hour or so.
16:23:54 jaypipes jangutter: no problem at all.
16:33:26 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Microversion 2.52 - Enable cold migration with target host https://review.openstack.org/406707
16:35:31 mriedem bauzas: ok email to the ML sent about bps close to done
16:36:00 openstackgerrit zhang zhenzhong proposed openstack/nova master: fix resource-provider regist failed in db while placement endpoint created after nova-compute start https://review.openstack.org/483460
16:38:22 openstackgerrit zhang zhenzhong proposed openstack/nova master: fix resource-provider regist failed in db while placement endpoint created after nova-compute start https://review.openstack.org/483460
16:45:47 mriedem jaypipes: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/482383/ is the current focus right now right?
16:45:55 mriedem it's not https://review.openstack.org/#/c/482381/
16:46:02 mriedem the dep tree is confusing me
16:47:10 jaypipes mriedem: I needed to go in a different direction on those. I will abandon both.
16:47:20 mriedem ok
16:47:31 mriedem well claim_resources() is +W so yay
16:47:39 jaypipes yeah, that's fine.
16:47:41 jaypipes self contained.
16:47:51 jaypipes should have new series pushed today.
16:47:54 mriedem ack
16:59:25 cdent use as you see fit
17:00:34 jaypipes cdent: you can keep the spare pug. just double the jack.
17:00:42 cdent noted
17:00:52 cdent I’ve kinda sorta always wanted a pug of my very own
17:01:14 openstackgerrit zhang zhenzhong proposed openstack/nova master: fix rp regist failed while placement endpoint created after nova-compute start https://review.openstack.org/483460
17:03:40 jaypipes cdent: they are great, in moderation.
17:03:47 jaypipes cdent: three is my limit.
17:06:03 openstackgerrit zhang zhenzhong proposed openstack/nova master: fix rp registration failed while placement endpoint created after compute start https://review.openstack.org/483460
17:06:47 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Update policy descriptions for base. https://review.openstack.org/472622
17:06:47 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Use oslo.polcy DocumentedRuleDefault https://review.openstack.org/472634
17:06:48 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove 'create_rule_default' https://review.openstack.org/479773
17:06:48 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Consistent policies https://review.openstack.org/479774
17:07:15 mriedem easy +W here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/479773/
17:08:23 jaypipes 143gg
17:08:27 jaypipes guh
17:20:21 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Consistent policies https://review.openstack.org/479774
17:20:21 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Update policy descriptions for base. https://review.openstack.org/472622
17:25:55 cdent mriedem: if you’re in a policy kind of way, does this make sense: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/481443/
17:37:44 melwitt internet is on the fritz again. comcast ...
17:37:56 melwitt dansmith: roger that. will update
17:38:56 mriedem cdent: oh boy
17:39:13 mriedem so, it usually takes me about 3 days to figure out where the rules are defined
17:39:45 melwitt dansmith, mriedem I have been wondering about the behavior change for resize confirm/revert. currently, it's possible to fail confirm/revert with OverQuota. during earlier discussions on the quota patch review (the monolith) we were thinking we should change the behavior and not block confirm/revert and instead limit max pending resizes
17:39:55 cdent this is part of why I’m asking because me<->policies, not friends
17:39:55 melwitt should we keep with that change or should we maintain the current behavior?
17:40:25 mriedem melwitt: i'm generally not in favor of behavior changes slipping in with major refactors
17:40:35 mriedem because it adds all the extra complication
17:40:44 mriedem but i don't know why the original decision was made
17:40:49 mriedem ?
17:40:49 mriedem you said that was from johnthetubaguy
17:41:16 melwitt I thought it was johnthetubaguy who suggested it but I might be remembering that wrong. it was months ago
17:41:56 melwitt yeah, I feel like I'm not too into the idea of changing the behavior either. I was thinking about it and I don't think you can get stuck in a limbo state with a pending resize
17:42:13 melwitt if you get blocked on confirm, you can revert. if you get blocked on revert, you confirm. unless I'm missing something
17:42:13 mriedem cdent: so i think the answer is it comes from somewhere in the bowels of keystone
17:42:56 mriedem so you'd get blocked on confirm if you are resizing up, yes?
17:43:02 melwitt yes
17:43:06 mriedem how do you get blocked on revert? resizing down?
17:43:08 mriedem so the revert goes up
17:43:09 melwitt yes
17:43:22 melwitt resize down generally isn't a thing but I think it's allowed for BFV
17:43:25 mriedem since we don't have reservations for resize now,
17:43:37 mriedem well,
17:43:46 mriedem nvm
17:43:54 mriedem i was thinking somehow reservations in the old way helped this here
17:44:04 mriedem but that would only help when you're resizing up
17:44:24 mriedem well either way i guess,
17:44:41 mriedem but yeah if this was a way you could fail over quota before, i don't know why we wouldn't just continue to count quota on confirm/revert
17:44:50 mriedem and fail if the current state of the world has changed and you're screwd
17:44:53 mriedem *screwed even

Earlier   Later