| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-02-19 | |||
| 15:08:18 | mriedem | Placeed: not unless suse patched it in their distro | |
| 15:08:19 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Thanks; will read | |
| 15:08:20 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: the patch you linked is not quite what we need but i have added the details to the spec for what we would need to allow numa aware pcie virtualisation within the guest | |
| 15:08:40 | efried | Placeed: The shared provider support mriedem is talking about is feature work that's been in progress for several releases now. | |
| 15:08:48 | Placeed | mriedem : Could you help me to identify which fix it is ? I can ask them | |
| 15:08:55 | mriedem | Placeed: there is no fix upstream yet | |
| 15:09:00 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Ah; right. For PCIe, we'd also mention the need for Q35 machine type — as that's mandatory for PCIe | |
| 15:09:08 | kashyap | (I'd guess you already know that.) | |
| 15:09:15 | mriedem | Placeed: there is https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:fix-bfv-boot-resources+(status:open+OR+status:merged) but there is not agreement on merging those changes | |
| 15:09:20 | mriedem | as they would introduce some technical debt | |
| 15:09:25 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: well i dont think it acutlly is | |
| 15:09:34 | mriedem | Placeed: you could take those, rebase them, and patch them into your env as a workaround | |
| 15:09:39 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: can you show me where that is stated? | |
| 15:09:40 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Let me double-check on my comment w/ the Virt folks | |
| 15:09:53 | kashyap | Because, pretty sure I was told so by a QEMU dev | |
| 15:09:55 | efried | Placeed: For the "real fix", a lot of the groundwork has been laid at this point, and it's just possible we'll put it on the slate for Rocky. We'll be talking about that at the PTG next week. | |
| 15:09:58 | mriedem | Placeed: but if those patches never land, you're left with the fork | |
| 15:10:05 | Placeed | mriedem : But it mean actually everybody who is using NFS / CInder have the same issue on openstack right ? | |
| 15:10:22 | Placeed | Or it's only me on my suse distribution | |
| 15:10:31 | mnaser | good morning everyone, just going to drop https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+topic:bug/1404867 here if someone feels like going through these patches, they're ready for final review (afaik) | |
| 15:10:51 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: based on https://github.com/qemu/qemu/blob/master/docs/pcie.txt it does seam to be related to Q35 but not sure its a hard dependecy | |
| 15:11:09 | mriedem | Placeed: it's not just you | |
| 15:11:31 | hrw | kashyap: thx | |
| 15:11:36 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: using the Q35 chipset is likely a good idea anyway | |
| 15:11:45 | Placeed | mriedem : So another workaround would be to have a local disk as big as all my vm's root disk running on that server right ? | |
| 15:12:04 | hrw | kashyap: BP mentions q35 but right, commit can describe it more too | |
| 15:13:16 | hrw | kashyap: release note describes x86/q35 and aarch64/virt | |
| 15:14:48 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Okay, I double-confirmed, and indeed Q35 is a hard dep for PCIe. | |
| 15:14:55 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: That doc you linked to should be updated; I'll update it | |
| 15:14:56 | mriedem | Placeed: i'm not sure about that | |
| 15:15:16 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: But, look here (the URL from the doc you mentioned), on slide-13: https://wiki.qemu.org/images/4/4e/Q35.pdf | |
| 15:15:25 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: It says: "Q35-only features: PCIe goodies [...]" | |
| 15:15:38 | hrw | sean-k-mooney: q35 is hard dep for pcie. | |
| 15:15:46 | Placeed | mriedem : What could be a workaround while i wait the official patch ? | |
| 15:16:10 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: yes but the feature i was memtioning is not listed in that slide and qemu had limited pcie support before the uese of q35 | |
| 15:16:11 | hrw | sean-k-mooney: qemu has 3 x86 platforms: isa-pc (no one uses), i440fx (pci based), q35 (pcie based) | |
| 15:16:29 | mriedem | Placeed: i'm not intimately familiar with the bug nor the fix - melwitt has carried the patch for a long time, so she might be able to help once she's around | |
| 15:16:31 | sean-k-mooney | hrw: really i taught i440fx supported pcie | |
| 15:16:42 | hrw | sean-k-mooney: i440fx is older than pcie ;D | |
| 15:17:13 | mriedem | Placeed: you could also ask about that bug in the #openstack-operators channel and ask if anyone has patched it out of tree and if so, how? | |
| 15:17:17 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Yeah, first I'll read your full comment before talking further. And yes, Q35 does have the limitation you note. | |
| 15:17:38 | mriedem | Placeed: i know SAP is probably doing something for it | |
| 15:17:47 | mriedem | they use NFS for everything, and are i think suse customers | |
| 15:18:11 | Placeed | mriedem : Ok thank you very very much for your help. I will also check with SUSE Guys. | |
| 15:18:58 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: My second sentence in my previous message was misphrased. Correct: Q35 _solves_ that limitation of older QEMUs PCIe support. | |
| 15:19:32 | hrw | would be nice to see some future qemu dropping <q35 ;D | |
| 15:19:48 | hrw | but that's not gonna happen | |
| 15:19:56 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1740241 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Network info not always displayed for a created instance" [Undecided,New] | |
| 15:19:56 | bauzas | stupid question but we get network information from the compute right ? https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1740241 | |
| 15:20:06 | bauzas | at least until we do that from the conductor | |
| 15:21:43 | mriedem | efried: questoin here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/540111/5/specs/rocky/approved/update-provider-tree.rst@73 | |
| 15:21:44 | bauzas | nevermind, got the line | |
| 15:23:43 | mriedem | lyarwood: are you around this week? i want to flush some ocata patches since ocata eol is supposedly next week | |
| 15:24:33 | kashyap | hrw: Yes, that won't happen. Majority still use the 'i440fx', as you can guess. | |
| 15:25:11 | hrw | yep | |
| 15:25:34 | kashyap | mriedem: FWIW, I at least saw him on IRC briefly in the (CET) morning | |
| 15:28:08 | bauzas | mriedem: I can help | |
| 15:28:36 | bauzas | mriedem: lemme know which ones you'd like to see reviewed | |
| 15:28:41 | bauzas | for the moment, looking at LP | |
| 15:30:46 | mriedem | bauzas: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:stable/ocata+label:Code-Review=2 | |
| 15:31:01 | mriedem | some of those might have things on pike yet | |
| 15:31:08 | mriedem | like https://review.openstack.org/#/c/539008/ | |
| 15:31:13 | bauzas | mriedem: ack, will look at them ASAIC | |
| 15:31:20 | mriedem | thanks | |
| 15:31:37 | bauzas | 24 open bugs :p | |
| 15:31:41 | bauzas | woooot | |
| 15:45:48 | sean-k-mooney | hrw: kashyap is there a spec to enable Q35 proposed. i assume it will be via an image metadata item or perhaps a config option in the libvirt section of the nova.conf | |
| 15:46:00 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: I updated the upstream QEMU doc to clearly spell out machine type requirements for PCIe features. | |
| 15:46:15 | hrw | sean-k-mooney: you set hw_machine_type = q35 in image and done | |
| 15:46:16 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Hmm, not that I know of; I have a TODO item to propose one, unless someone beats me to it | |
| 15:46:27 | kashyap | But yeah, currently what hrw tells above ^ | |
| 15:46:38 | hrw | sean-k-mooney: and then you review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/545034/ to have slots for hotplug ;d | |
| 15:46:41 | kashyap | You can either set it via the machine type Nova image metadat property | |
| 15:46:47 | kashyap | Or via the global configuration option | |
| 15:47:26 | hrw | sean-k-mooney: as AArch64 porter I would love to see more and more people moving to Q35 | |
| 15:47:48 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: FWIW, I sent that (hopefully) clarifying patch -- https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-02/msg04905.html | |
| 15:50:39 | hrw | sean-k-mooney: as then they will share similar issues as we have on aarch64 ;D | |
| 15:57:06 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: So these are the two possibilities with Nova: | |
| 15:57:13 | kashyap | (1) Image metadata property: | |
| 15:57:19 | kashyap | $ openstack image set --property hw_machine_type=x86_64=pc-q35-2.10 Fedora27_Template | |
| 15:57:22 | kashyap | (2) Nova conf: | |
| 15:57:35 | kashyap | hw_machine_type=x86_64=pc-q35-2.10 | |
| 15:57:35 | kashyap | ... | |
| 15:57:35 | kashyap | [libvirt] | |
| 15:58:32 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: The remaining item in Nova is graceful handling of "distributions shipping 'q35' by default". | |
| 16:03:19 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/os-vif master: zuul: Enable functional tests in gate https://review.openstack.org/530961 | |
| 16:07:47 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: yep that all makes sense to me. operator can set in in nova.conf if they want to force it by default or tenant can request it in image metadata if there image requires q35 features to work e.g. vIOMMU support | |
| 16:09:20 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: hrw it seams pretty strait forward to add Q35 support so a specless blueprint might be sufficent. will ye be at the ptg next week? | |
| 16:10:59 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Yes, at least I'll be there | |
| 16:11:17 | kashyap | (And nod to your previous comment, too) | |
| 16:16:50 | mriedem | dansmith: left a comment in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/544698/2/nova/tests/unit/db/test_sqlalchemy_migration.py - if you're meh on that, then i'll +2 anyway | |
| 16:19:01 | dansmith | mriedem: I'm pretty meh | |
| 16:23:10 | efried | jaypipes, cdent: edleafe: mriedem found a discrepancy in the update_provider_tree spec that I'd like to discuss and clear up. | |
| 16:23:21 | cdent | was just reading that | |
| 16:23:55 | efried | Here's the scenario: my compute node is aggregated with a sharing provider. The sharing provider happens to be part of its own tree. We want the sharing provider itself to be included in the ProviderTree that u_p_t gets - that's for sure. | |
| 16:23:58 | efried | But | |
| 16:24:30 | efried | Do we want to include the sharing provider's whole tree? Or just the provider itself, as a "root" even if it isn't really a root in its own tree? | |
| 16:25:14 | efried | jaypipes: I want to say you and I discussed this briefly when I was writing the code and decided on the latter, but thinking through it again, I'm not convinced that's The Right Thing. | |
| 16:25:31 | edleafe | efried: sounds like you have a huge recursion problem if you include trees of trees of trees of ... | |
| 16:25:38 | mriedem | i assume the compute driver got an n-1 view of things it doesn't control | |