Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-12-22
16:50:14 mdbooth artom: Yes. That's an execution order which would cause incorrect behaviour if we didn't handle it.
16:50:34 openstackgerrit Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Make BlockDeviceMapping object support uuid https://review.openstack.org/242603
16:50:35 openstackgerrit Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: DriverBlockDevice: make subclasses inherit _proxy_as_attr https://review.openstack.org/524167
16:50:35 openstackgerrit Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Add an online migration for BDM.uuid https://review.openstack.org/525599
16:50:36 openstackgerrit Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Expose BDM uuid to drivers https://review.openstack.org/529037
16:50:42 mdbooth artom: However, it's gone ^^^ ;)
16:50:51 artom mdbooth, dammit
16:51:03 artom mdbooth, I still want to understand you
16:51:17 mdbooth artom: It's a good test, but a totally agree that it's more complicated that it needs to be
16:52:00 mdbooth Anyway, I'm going to run for the hills!
16:52:13 mdbooth Merry Christmas, all! See you in the New Year.
16:55:06 openstackgerrit Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: create vGPU for instance https://review.openstack.org/528832
16:57:49 artom mdbooth, enjoy your ugly sweaters ;)
17:12:48 mriedem figleaf: heh my bash fu always fails the first few times
17:14:25 figleaf mriedem: don't feel bad - I felt uneasy +1'ing that because my bash-fu is so weak
17:14:37 figleaf it looked logical, thougn
17:14:39 figleaf though
17:15:29 mriedem it does do the correct thing for nova_cell1.conf
17:15:30 mriedem so that's good
17:19:22 mriedem someone was mentioning issues with the NumInstances filter yesterday, and i got thinking about that one, if you ran multiple filter scheduler processes, that filter would be totally racey
17:19:38 mriedem depending on which process gets a request, or if both are processing requests at the same time for the same host
17:20:26 mriedem if the limit is 10 and you've got 9 on a host already, and both workers get a request at the same time, they'd both think there is room for one more and could choose it
17:20:32 mriedem placement doesn't fix that
17:20:37 mriedem only reschedules would fix that
17:21:30 mriedem seems like a totally useless filter anyway assuming you have any non-trivial number of flavors
17:21:48 kashyap mriedem: Hey, when you have a moment, you know why this is failing? (I know it's coming from my change) -- http://logs.openstack.org/11/529611/3/check/openstack-tox-py27/f611b46/job-output.txt.gz#_2017-12-21_17_29_32_011876
17:21:54 kashyap ( https://review.openstack.org/#/c/529611/ )
17:22:09 kashyap It's just doing something super simple; adding a config class & test that XML element
17:22:22 kashyap Ah, I see it
17:22:28 kashyap My test is trying to do it as:
17:22:29 kashyap 2017-12-21 17:29:32.012231 | ubuntu-xenial | </smm>
17:22:29 kashyap 2017-12-21 17:29:32.012215 | ubuntu-xenial | <smm state="on"/>
17:22:29 kashyap 2017-12-21 17:29:32.012197 | ubuntu-xenial | <smm>
17:22:34 kashyap However, it should be:
17:23:26 kashyap <features>
17:23:26 kashyap ...
17:23:27 kashyap <smm state='on'/>
17:23:27 kashyap <apic/>
17:23:27 kashyap <acpi/>
17:23:29 kashyap </features>
17:23:31 kashyap ...
17:23:40 kashyap mriedem: Disregard me. I'll rework the tests
17:24:03 mriedem looks like it doesn't like <smm state="on"/>
17:24:13 mriedem http://logs.openstack.org/11/529611/3/check/openstack-tox-py27/f611b46/job-output.txt.gz#_2017-12-21_17_29_32_012165
17:24:17 kashyap mriedem: But if you see, the test is trying to do:
17:24:21 kashyap <smm>
17:24:32 kashyap <smm state="on">
17:24:34 kashyap </smm>
17:24:42 kashyap But there's no top-level 'smm' attribute
17:24:55 kashyap It is _one_ of the sub elements of the 'features' attribute
17:28:09 mriedem commented in the patch
17:29:31 kashyap That's fast. /me clicks
17:30:55 kashyap mriedem: Thanks. You could actually -1 it, don't be so polite.
17:30:57 kashyap :P
17:31:29 mriedem there you go
17:34:24 kashyap Heh, you (-)one-upped it :-)
17:39:37 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Sanity check for NumInstancesFilter https://review.openstack.org/529866
17:40:11 bauwser folks, bailing out for vacations
17:40:18 bauwser see you in 2018 \o
17:40:54 bauzas haha
17:40:57 bauzas i'm back!
17:41:18 kashyap mriedem: Hmm, I actually modelled it just like other features, the class -- LibvirtConfigGuestFeatureAPIC() or LibvirtConfigGuestFeaturePAE()
17:41:38 bauzas donne moi du fromage savoureux
17:41:41 kashyap More appropriate one is - LibvirtConfigGuestFeatureKvmHidden(). Because it also as sub-element
17:44:25 kashyap No, I'm wrong, the KvmHidden() thing has its own element.
17:47:26 mriedem kashyap: more inline
17:47:32 mriedem for your subelement woes
17:47:52 mriedem your root element is the smm element,
17:48:00 mriedem you are adding a sub-element to that, which is wrong,
17:48:05 mriedem you need to set an attribute on the smm element
17:48:08 mriedem which is your root
17:48:26 mriedem xml is f'ing awesome
17:48:34 kashyap Yeah, I should model it something like LibvirtConfigGuestSMBIOS()
17:48:41 kashyap I know, XML...
17:49:02 kashyap From what I recall about why libvirt chose XML was...
17:50:02 kashyap The initial author of libvirt Daniel Veillard was on W3C standards, and 'libxml' maintainer...
17:50:11 kashyap Not sure JSON was there at that time yet
17:50:41 kashyap So now they're (we) stuck with it...
17:51:27 mriedem i worked on a project for 6 years dealing with https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/sdd/
17:51:30 mriedem so i'm familiar
17:52:06 mriedem you'd think i'd actually know something about tosca and heat and nfv stuff, but...
17:52:09 kashyap Wauw. Yeah, I knnow OSAIS standards; the 'virtio' documentation also is hosted there
17:52:38 kashyap But at the recent KVM Forum in Prague, I saw users of virtio, who want to implement devices complaining of the super dense documentation / standards.
17:52:55 mriedem maybe they would prefer CIM
17:52:58 kashyap Heh
17:53:46 kashyap mriedem: When you're back, I have a small future spec topic, for design discussion
17:54:00 kashyap If you're busy after lunch, and can't get to it; it's fine. This can wait
18:16:27 openstackgerrit Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Introduce SMM (System Management Mode) config class https://review.openstack.org/529611
18:39:07 f10d4 re
18:41:11 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Add retry_on_deadlock decorator to action_event_start https://review.openstack.org/529672
19:09:41 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Remove extensions module https://review.openstack.org/529206
19:09:46 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Remove the LoadedExtensionInfo object https://review.openstack.org/529207
19:48:48 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova stable/newton: Use instance.project_id when creating request specs for old instances https://review.openstack.org/529389
21:28:36 mriedem melwitt: in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/334614/ the commit message says, "We cannot store the entire access_url in the database because it contains the token, but we can keep the base part of the url and generate the full access_url on demand."
21:28:45 mriedem but the spec talks quite a bit about storing a token in the db
21:28:53 mriedem "Because the new tokens will go in the database we need to consider cells v2."
21:31:32 mriedem maybe that's in a later change, the one that adds the ConsoleConnection object and db model?
21:37:20 mriedem maybe this just means we don't store the token in the url in the db because the token would make the url too long?
21:37:22 mriedem or it's not hashed?
22:12:59 efried_cya_jan mriedem It's 'powervm: recheck'. I'll send a note to esberglu to add it to the wiki

Earlier   Later