| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-01-24 | |||
| 20:11:20 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: Add Neutron port capabilities to devspec in request https://review.openstack.org/451777 | |
| 20:11:20 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: Change 'InstancePCIRequest' spec field https://review.openstack.org/449257 | |
| 20:11:21 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: Read Neutron port 'binding_profile' during boot https://review.openstack.org/507481 | |
| 20:11:21 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: Format NIC features using os-traits definitions https://review.openstack.org/466051 | |
| 20:16:32 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: if you have time tomorow rodoflos nic feature based schduling patch series is now all rebased with versioned objects https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/enable-sriov-nic-features+(status:Open) | |
| 20:24:20 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add release note for QEMU native LUKS decryption https://review.openstack.org/537642 | |
| 20:32:17 | mriedem | melwitt: some questions in that reno | |
| 20:32:56 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: set_{aggregates|traits}_for_provider: tolerate set https://review.openstack.org/536625 | |
| 20:32:56 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: ProviderTree.get_provider_uuids: Top-down ordering https://review.openstack.org/536624 | |
| 20:32:57 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Use update_provider_tree from resource tracker https://review.openstack.org/520246 | |
| 20:32:57 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: SchedulerReportClient.update_from_provider_tree https://review.openstack.org/533821 | |
| 20:32:58 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Move refresh time from report client to prov tree https://review.openstack.org/535517 | |
| 20:32:58 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Fix nits in update_provider_tree series https://review.openstack.org/531260 | |
| 20:32:59 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: New-style _set_inventory_for_provider https://review.openstack.org/537648 | |
| 20:46:59 | dansmith | tssurya_: any word from belmiro? | |
| 20:47:51 | tssurya_ | dansmith: no, nothing yet | |
| 20:48:21 | dansmith | okay I guess we'll just go forward with it, see if he shows up and if not, bail :) | |
| 20:48:48 | tssurya_ | we had a couple of things to discuss, but nothing urgent; | |
| 20:49:03 | tssurya_ | in case he doesn't show up, we will just ask in the channel tomorrow | |
| 20:51:51 | tssurya_ | oh cool he is here | |
| 20:51:53 | dansmith | well, lookie there | |
| 20:52:21 | dansmith | belmoreira: we were going to cancel the cells meeting to focus on other things, but tssurya_ rained on our parade and said you were coming with things to talk about | |
| 20:54:26 | belmoreira | hi dansmith. We will move to Ocata next week. Then start preparing Pike and cellsV2 | |
| 20:54:44 | mriedem | but ocata requires cellsv2...? | |
| 20:54:45 | mriedem | i'm confused | |
| 20:55:07 | dansmith | ocata being single cell I assume | |
| 20:55:32 | belmoreira | I'm interested about the progress in listing instances if a cell goes down and the quota issue | |
| 20:55:57 | mriedem | belmoreira: there hasn't been any progress on that, | |
| 20:55:57 | belmoreira | mriedem: in Ocata we define only one cell but continue to use cellsV1 | |
| 20:55:59 | dansmith | belmoreira: tssurya_ was going to put up a straw man for us to discuss with api people | |
| 20:56:02 | mriedem | it's a discussion item for the ptg | |
| 20:56:13 | jackie-truong | mriedem: The cert validation patch series has been +2'd :-) Can I move it to the "Needs final +2 to complete blueprint" section in the nova-queens-blueprint-status etherpad? | |
| 20:56:16 | dansmith | which I don't think has been posted, or at least that I saw | |
| 20:56:25 | mriedem | jackie-truong: go for it | |
| 20:56:40 | jackie-truong | mriedem: *\o/* | |
| 20:57:19 | belmoreira | tssurya_ and I started to check for some alternatives. The PTG for us may be to late | |
| 20:57:19 | tssurya_ | dansmith : we have been working on it and have some ideas/questions on how to proceed | |
| 20:57:28 | mriedem | jackie-truong: i don't understand why this isn't in the series before the API change? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/479949/ | |
| 20:57:34 | dansmith | tssurya_: okay cool | |
| 20:58:20 | belmoreira | I would like to move to Pike in few weeks after Ocata. Meaning that we will need to cook something even it's only internal | |
| 20:59:18 | jackie-truong | mriedem: That patch implements the the certificate_utils module, but doesn't make any changes to the API. So it basically adds the functionality with no way to use it. | |
| 20:59:46 | jackie-truong | mriedem: The API change adds the usability part | |
| 20:59:58 | mriedem | jackie-truong: so technically here, | |
| 21:00:03 | mriedem | we could merge the API, | |
| 21:00:17 | mriedem | w/o the utils merged to do the things the api says you can do, right? | |
| 21:00:36 | mriedem | adding functionality that is eventually exposed out of the rest api is kind of how all new things work | |
| 21:01:26 | jackie-truong | The API change works with the trusted_certs object added in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/489408/ | |
| 21:01:33 | jackie-truong | So, techincally | |
| 21:01:59 | jackie-truong | We could merge the API change (which would require the trusted_certs object change to be merged) | |
| 21:02:17 | jackie-truong | which would result in you being able to create and pass around a TrustedCerts object | |
| 21:02:20 | jackie-truong | Without making use of it | |
| 21:02:20 | mriedem | what does the cert utils module do then? | |
| 21:02:46 | mriedem | if i can't make use of the thing, what's the point of having the api before said thing works? | |
| 21:02:56 | jackie-truong | the cert utils module takes in the TrustedCerts object (which gets turned into a list of strings) | |
| 21:03:33 | jackie-truong | I realize that it technically makes sense to have the dependencies work: TrustedCerts object -> API -> cert_utils module | |
| 21:03:45 | jackie-truong | But technically, that isn't necessary | |
| 21:04:09 | jackie-truong | Since the API can be updated to pass around a useless object | |
| 21:04:10 | mriedem | no i was saying object > util (make things do something) > API (expose the things that do something) | |
| 21:05:01 | jackie-truong | Yeah, that timeline makes sense too. Basically, both util and API changes depend on the object change | |
| 21:05:20 | jackie-truong | but util and API don't have any dependency on each other | |
| 21:06:00 | jackie-truong | So we used the depends-on tag to indicate what dependencies needed to build | |
| 21:06:41 | mriedem | jackie-truong: i think you're asserting like code deps, and i'm asserting functionality deps | |
| 21:06:43 | melwitt | mriedem: replied | |
| 21:06:45 | jroll | mriedem: our jobs are no longer segfaulting n-cond as of this morning, so nfi what was causing it :/ | |
| 21:06:55 | mriedem | jroll: huh | |
| 21:06:57 | mriedem | success! | |
| 21:07:09 | jroll | ikr | |
| 21:07:20 | jroll | proves "have a beer and try again tomorrow" is always a good plan | |
| 21:07:41 | jackie-truong | mriedem: Correct. Should the depends-on tag be used for functionality deps, too? | |
| 21:09:28 | sean-k-mooney | jroll: hum well it works. kind of hoped you would get to the bottom of that one | |
| 21:10:00 | jroll | sean-k-mooney: yeah, me too, but is nice to have it off my back | |
| 21:10:49 | mriedem | jackie-truong: you don't need a depends-on when it's in the same repo, just stack the changes in a series | |
| 21:10:53 | mriedem | object > utils > API | |
| 21:11:05 | mriedem | the API changes should always be the last thing to go | |
| 21:11:47 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: logic being dont expose the feature at the api until its fully done right | |
| 21:12:30 | mriedem | sean-k-mooney: yes that's generally how things should work | |
| 21:12:48 | mriedem | because we support CD, | |
| 21:12:53 | mriedem | so that API can be in the wild once it's merged | |
| 21:12:56 | mriedem | and we have to support it | |
| 21:14:11 | jackie-truong | mriedem: Got it. bpoulos will fix shortly | |
| 21:14:19 | bpoulos | mriedem: I'll update the API order. I think we chose the way we did because that was the order it was listed in in the spec (at http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/queens/approved/nova-validate-certificates.html ) | |
| 21:28:28 | openstackgerrit | Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Implement certificate_utils https://review.openstack.org/479949 | |
| 21:28:28 | openstackgerrit | Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Add trusted_certs object https://review.openstack.org/489408 | |
| 21:28:29 | openstackgerrit | Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Add trusted_image_certificates to REST API https://review.openstack.org/486204 | |
| 21:49:04 | openstackgerrit | Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Add trusted_certs object https://review.openstack.org/489408 | |
| 21:53:43 | openstackgerrit | Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Implement certificate_utils https://review.openstack.org/479949 | |
| 21:54:43 | openstackgerrit | Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Add trusted_image_certificates to REST API https://review.openstack.org/486204 | |
| 21:59:41 | openstackgerrit | Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Add trusted_certs object https://review.openstack.org/489408 | |
| 22:00:30 | openstackgerrit | Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Implement certificate_utils https://review.openstack.org/479949 | |
| 22:00:45 | openstackgerrit | Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Add trusted_image_certificates to REST API https://review.openstack.org/486204 | |
| 22:01:16 | mriedem | tssurya_: dansmith: melwitt: L74 https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-ptg-rocky | |
| 22:01:22 | mriedem | updated to summarize some of the meeting notes | |
| 22:01:32 | dansmith | awesome | |
| 22:01:38 | melwitt | thanks for doing that | |
| 22:04:06 | tssurya_ | mriedem : thanks for putting it all in one place, | |
| 22:07:04 | jackie-truong | mriedem: dependency orders are now fixed. sorry about that | |
| 22:19:38 | mriedem | lyarwood: is the native luks swap volume thing b/c of blockRebase? and if so, is that then also an issue for guest-assisted snapshot of encrypted volumes for volumes like NFS/gluster? | |
| 22:20:10 | mriedem | i don't know if we even have a tempest test for creating a snapshot of an instance with an encrypted volume attached, probably not | |
| 22:20:28 | mriedem | and if we did, it would only be run in the NFS CI | |
| 22:26:37 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Move remaining uses of parted to privsep. https://review.openstack.org/519483 | |