Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2018-03-29
17:56:46 artom Eh?
17:57:04 artom Did failing to run pep8 in my impatience come back to bite me?
17:57:07 mriedem https://review.openstack.org/#/c/552722/10/specs/rocky/approved/numa-aware-live-migration.rst@173
17:57:17 jaypipes artom: hold up on pushing again.. I have other comments
17:57:35 cdent jmlowe_: that jeremy fellow should be regularly shunned
17:57:50 artom An evil squit, to be clear
17:57:51 mriedem artom: feel free to bug me about that spec (later) since i want to check the mechanics on the conductor / mixed compute version negotiation stuff
17:58:26 artom mriedem, sure, thanks :) Do you mean the implementation though? The spec doesn't really spell it out, other than "the conductor is going to do it"
17:58:31 dansmith efried: ...oh
17:58:40 fungi er, flies
17:59:05 jmlowe_ whack the underside of his tray to send his early drink flying
17:59:25 mriedem artom: i'll see
17:59:37 dansmith oh in the thread, that's why I didn't see it
18:00:39 jaypipes artom: k, reviewd.
18:02:47 cfriesen dansmith: do we currently have a mechanism to purge entries from the nova_cell0 db?
18:03:07 openstackgerrit Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova-specs master: NUMA-aware live migration https://review.openstack.org/552722
18:03:20 cdent fungi: jmlowe_ works with one of my oldest friends, who happens to travel a lot, and thus is not in the cheap seats
18:03:22 artom jaypipes, thank you! And right back to you :D
18:05:11 mriedem cfriesen: yes
18:05:24 dansmith cfriesen: yes, nova-manage db purge --all-cells, or without that and pointing at something with just cell0 configured
18:05:32 dansmith s/something/a config/
18:05:38 mriedem https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/cli/nova-manage.html#nova-database
18:05:54 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Fix issue for pep8 on py3 https://review.openstack.org/557633
18:05:54 mriedem you have to archive first
18:05:59 cfriesen mriedem: thx
18:06:39 mriedem cfriesen: note that purge CLI is new in rocky
18:07:05 mriedem wonder if we should have a 'since' tag on our CLI docs
18:08:13 fungi cdent: i figured. i tend not to even track airline miles because it depresses me to think about how much i travel (and i don't even travel that much compared to a lot of people in this community)
18:10:20 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: VMware: add log message for VIF info details https://review.openstack.org/557256
18:10:27 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Start untangling network utilities. https://review.openstack.org/557542
18:10:36 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Move two more generic network utilities to a move obvious place. https://review.openstack.org/557543
18:13:52 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: vmware: Fixes _detach_instance_volumes method https://review.openstack.org/557377
18:15:47 kashyap dansmith: When you get a moment, unit test question: this "works", but can you tell if that deceptively "simple" 'mock_warn' is correct: http://paste.openstack.org/show/717935/
18:16:58 kashyap (Catching this warning: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534384/20/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py@3871)
18:17:17 jaypipes artom: back at ya ;)
18:17:23 dansmith mriedem: yawna nak my version argument in the doc so I can update or not and resubmit
18:17:24 dansmith /
18:17:25 dansmith /
18:18:46 dansmith kashyap: that works and is done elsewhere, but I also don't care that you assert that the warn was called, but that you executed that code. If you had a typo in anything inside that if, you wouldn't hit it in your tests unless you cause the if to be true, which is the real goal
18:19:11 openstackgerrit Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova-specs master: NUMA-aware live migration https://review.openstack.org/552722
18:19:42 kashyap dansmith: Yep; the typo inside the 'if' is taken care by the config "choices", right
18:19:49 dansmith kashyap: no
18:19:50 kashyap That's why we moved it there
18:19:52 dansmith no
18:20:00 kashyap Err, I mean, let me rephrase
18:20:07 dansmith if condition: LOG.warrrrrning('foo')
18:20:17 dansmith that would not fail tests unless you cause condition to be true
18:20:18 jaypipes artom: aaaaannndddd... +2. :)
18:20:32 artom jaypipes, yey! Thank you
18:21:01 dansmith kashyap: no failure: https://pastebin.com/A2muKWxU
18:21:24 mriedem dansmith: is that "you want to" or "you going to"?
18:21:27 artom I was worried we'd "hit" an asymptote and never get there ;)
18:21:35 mriedem i can't parse that southern drawl
18:21:48 kashyap dansmith: Okido; noted.
18:21:49 dansmith mriedem: you want to, although I assume you're going to
18:22:18 mriedem dansmith: i already -1ed for the other stuff
18:22:24 mriedem oh you replied
18:22:25 mriedem sec
18:24:26 kashyap dansmith: Alright; to make you double-happy, I'll slap in another test for the 'host-passthrough'. As we have two conditions there
18:24:54 dansmith kashyap: if it's not related to your change, then save it for another patch
18:25:05 dansmith kashyap: but yes as I noted, we don't have tests for the other conditions there
18:25:07 kashyap dansmith: It's actually related, because:
18:25:09 mriedem dansmith: replied in the docs patch
18:25:32 dansmith mriedem: tanks
18:25:39 mriedem that's also why i called out my specific points for the -1
18:25:41 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Documentation for tenant isolation with placement https://review.openstack.org/557490
18:25:45 mriedem since the other was just discussion
18:25:56 kashyap dansmith: I wasn't sure if you wanted to me to test for *both* 'host-model' + 'host-passthrough' in this conditional:
18:25:58 mriedem coffee talk
18:25:59 kashyap + elif ((mode == "host-model" or mode == "host-passthrough" or
18:26:02 dansmith mriedem: heh
18:26:02 kashyap + model is None) and extra_flags):
18:26:23 kashyap dansmith: The second test would just identical, with the difference being: s/host-mode/host-passthrough/
18:26:26 dansmith kashyap: oh I see, I mostly care that the condition is true (there's only one condition) so you run the stuff in the body of the if.. that's all
18:26:43 kashyap Okido; I'll stick with one test
18:26:52 kashyap And I get to write more tests when we lift the choices in future.
18:26:53 dansmith kashyap: it doesn't matter that you check that == works a second time, we can trust python on that :)
18:26:58 kashyap LOL
18:27:23 dansmith kashyap: although mriedem is a stickler, he might want both flags checked, so it's not wrong to do both
18:27:25 kashyap One more: a preference question -- do you care betwee assertTrue vs assert_called_with
18:27:35 dansmith assertTrue only for booleans
18:27:45 kashyap I apprecite his stickliness (is it a word?). Because he did caught somethings I didn't like in my phrasing
18:27:55 kashyap And I was getting sick of reading my own text again and again
18:27:56 dansmith assertTrue(foo.called) is okay with me for LOG.warning just to make sure it was called,
18:28:08 dansmith but mriedem tends to do a looooot of string compare assertions that I do not
18:28:21 dansmith so he would do assert_called_with
18:30:15 mriedem assertTrue(foo.called) is so 2015
18:30:22 mriedem foo.assert_called()
18:30:28 mriedem foo.assert_not_called()
18:31:15 mriedem just because i commented on the release note, does that mean you expect me to go back and re-review this all again?!
18:31:40 kashyap mriedem: No. I'll actually nicely summarize in the main comment as to what all I addressed.
18:31:59 mriedem that can't be trusted
18:32:03 kashyap LOL
18:32:05 kashyap E.g.
18:32:06 kashyap - Undid the whitespace change in driver.py
18:32:06 kashyap PS21:
18:32:07 kashyap - Added an additional test in test_driver.py
18:32:07 kashyap - Changed the 'exception' to a LOG.warning in driver.py
18:32:08 kashyap - Clarify the release note that we're talking about libvirt where appropriate
18:32:12 kashyap - Remove the confusing comment about a future change & instead update the 'conf' file

Earlier   Later