Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2018-04-04
03:57:04 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: api-ref: add a note about volume-backed rescue not being supported https://review.openstack.org/556996
03:57:38 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: z/VM Driver: Initial change set of z/VM driver https://review.openstack.org/523387
03:57:39 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: z/VM Driver: add snapshot function https://review.openstack.org/534240
03:57:39 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: z/VM Driver: Spawn and destroy function of z/VM driver https://review.openstack.org/527658
03:57:40 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: z/VM Driver: add get console output https://review.openstack.org/543344
03:57:40 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: z/VM Driver: add power actions https://review.openstack.org/543340
04:04:41 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: ironic: Get correct inventory for deployed node https://review.openstack.org/553367
05:32:22 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: Avoid showing password in log https://review.openstack.org/558694
06:03:31 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: Remove a outdated warning https://review.openstack.org/557898
06:16:11 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in unit/virt/xenapi/test_vm_utils.py (1) https://review.openstack.org/558704
06:49:19 openstackgerrit sahid proposed openstack/nova-specs master: update: isolate guests emulthreads on CONF.cpu_shared_set https://review.openstack.org/511188
06:49:21 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: Network interface attach/detach https://review.openstack.org/546813
06:57:49 openstackgerrit sahid proposed openstack/nova-specs master: update: isolate guests emulthreads on CONF.cpu_shared_set https://review.openstack.org/511188
07:06:22 openstackgerrit OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/nova master: Imported Translations from Zanata https://review.openstack.org/548772
07:45:54 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: z/VM Driver: Initial change set of z/VM driver https://review.openstack.org/523387
07:45:55 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: z/VM Driver: add snapshot function https://review.openstack.org/534240
07:45:55 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: z/VM Driver: Spawn and destroy function of z/VM driver https://review.openstack.org/527658
07:45:56 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: z/VM Driver: add get console output https://review.openstack.org/543344
07:45:56 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: z/VM Driver: add power actions https://review.openstack.org/543340
07:53:26 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: Avoid showing password in log https://review.openstack.org/558694
07:53:29 kashyap johnthetubaguy: Morning; this is ready, if it's merged, can get going with the backports: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534384/
08:01:03 gmann johnthetubaguy: alex_xu_ gibi_away looking for feedback on this - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/547850/
09:46:41 openstackgerrit sahid proposed openstack/nova-specs master: update: isolate guests emulthreads on CONF.cpu_shared_set https://review.openstack.org/511188
09:50:18 naichuans Hi, dansmith, do you have the time to review below patches: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/554154/, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/489451/. It all about use xapi-pool instead of aggregate pool. We have finished internal review and the test. Thank you very much.
09:59:57 openstackgerrit Rajesh Tailor proposed openstack/nova master: Fix host validity check for live-migration https://review.openstack.org/401009
10:00:13 johnthetubaguy gmann: policy wise, I would prefer we concentrated on adopting the new set of roles, which I think we can do at the same time?
10:00:27 johnthetubaguy gmann: that might be stupid, what do you think?
10:02:56 kashyap johnthetubaguy: Sorry to nag, but I don't suppose you'd have time to have a gander again on the above?
10:03:07 kashyap Just trying to curb the "dragging on" of this
10:03:13 johnthetubaguy kashyap: its in my next tab :)
10:13:53 johnthetubaguy kashyap: you get my first +2 of the day, its a relief to actually +2 something!
10:14:04 kashyap johnthetubaguy: Haha
10:14:21 kashyap johnthetubaguy: Thank you! If your fingers are itching, here's another one: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/558171/
10:14:27 kashyap But it requires more discussion on the list
10:14:41 kashyap Topic of it: [RFC] Pick next minimum libvirt / QEMU versions for "Stein"
10:15:10 johnthetubaguy kashyap: ah right, I usually let distro people argue that one out, good to have the discussion though!
10:15:22 kashyap Yeah, I did an hour's sleuthing and wrote a new email
10:15:39 kashyap But `postfix` isn't letting me send it to openstack-{dev,operator} lists
10:20:57 johnthetubaguy kashyap: your libvirt version looks too new for Debian, did I miss something there?
10:21:18 kashyap johnthetubaguy: I know, this morning I even spent time on #debian-backports
10:21:44 kashyap johnthetubaguy: The discussion was:
10:21:45 kashyap asked:
10:21:45 kashyap I also talked on #debian-backports IRC channel on OFTC network, where I
10:21:46 kashyap libvirt 3.2.0 and QEMU 2.9.0, even if via a different repository.
10:21:46 kashyap "What I'm essentially looking for is: "How can 'stretch' users get
10:21:48 kashyap As they are proposed to be least common denominator versions across
10:21:50 kashyap distributions."
10:21:53 kashyap And two people said: Then the versions from 'Buster' could be backported
10:21:55 kashyap to 'stretch-backports'. The process for that is to: "ask the maintainer
10:21:58 kashyap of those package and Cc to the backports mailing list."
10:22:15 johnthetubaguy why 3.2 not 3.0.0?
10:22:28 johnthetubaguy well, and 2.9 rather than 2.8?
10:23:28 johnthetubaguy totally not against better stretch-backports, sounds like a good plan either way
10:24:01 kashyap johnthetubaguy: That is possible, actually -- to accomodate 'Stretch'
10:24:13 kashyap To use 3.0.0 and 2.8
10:24:30 johnthetubaguy its not a ... stretch (giggles like a school boy)
10:24:57 kashyap But we should remember that 3.2.0 and 2.9 are already much older
10:25:02 kashyap Hehe
10:25:08 kashyap johnthetubaguy: Did you also catch the email -- http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/2018-March/015067.html
10:25:20 kashyap Where I actually called out the Debian thing, and asked people to chime in
10:26:26 johnthetubaguy cool, seems like a step too far to exclude Debian, but its good to ask
10:26:44 kashyap Yeah, exactly. I *don't* want to exclude it
10:26:58 kashyap That's why I even spent an hour or two talking to the upstream Debian folks on OFTC
10:27:12 kashyap Just to see what could be done; since we can get rid of backward-compatibility code
10:31:17 johnthetubaguy kashyap: so can't we do the bump to 1.3.1 and 2.5.0 now ish?
10:31:48 kashyap johnthetubaguy: Yes, we can; that's what I'm working on.
10:32:05 kashyap > As it stands, during the "Pike" release the advertized NEXT_MIN versions
10:32:08 kashyap > were set to: libvirt 1.3.1 and QEMU 2.5.0 -- but they weren't actually
10:32:11 kashyap > bumped for the "Queens" release. So they will now be applied for the
10:32:14 kashyap > "Rocky" release.
10:32:19 kashyap johnthetubaguy: I think that's what you were referring to
10:32:29 johnthetubaguy kashyap: yeah, totally, just I would +2 that one
10:33:01 kashyap Yeah, it requires going through the whole codebase removing conditional cruft, etc. And fix relevant unit tests
10:33:11 kashyap Will post here once I'm ready in a bit
10:33:25 johnthetubaguy true... well there are two changes, the bump then the removal, depending on how you look at it :)
10:33:55 johnthetubaguy anyways, glad you are pushing on that, sounds worthwhile to me
10:39:35 kashyap johnthetubaguy: Yeah; there are multiple changes
10:39:45 kashyap Just bumping it won't magically pass everything, would it? :-)
10:40:06 kashyap Only one way to try
10:40:11 kashyap s/try/figure/
10:46:53 johnthetubaguy kashyap: ha, good question, it might do
10:47:15 johnthetubaguy not for good reasons, our testing of the min version is laughable, AFAIK
10:47:25 kashyap :D
10:51:34 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Fix endpoint URI /allocation_requests https://review.openstack.org/557580
10:55:48 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Provide error codes for placement API https://review.openstack.org/418393
11:02:58 sean-k-mooney johnthetubaguy: kashyap for the rocky realse are we then not going to bump byond those verions and just use what we had planned for queens
11:03:14 kashyap sean-k-mooney: That's a good question
11:03:35 kashyap sean-k-mooney: I don't know, since we didn't give a heads-up, then we should simply stick with the versions what we planned for 'Queens'?
11:03:41 kashyap I know it sucks
11:04:04 kashyap sean-k-mooney: But we _can_ bump it; if we all agree
11:04:20 sean-k-mooney its less then ideal but if we dont depend on somthing form a newer release then i guess we dont have to bump
11:04:21 kashyap > (Hmm, but note that libvirt 1.3.1 was released more
11:04:21 kashyap That's why I added the note to my post to the list:
11:04:24 kashyap > than 2 years ago[1].)
11:04:30 sean-k-mooney ya i know
11:04:35 sean-k-mooney thats why i asked :)
11:05:17 sean-k-mooney it finally means we dont have to check libvirt verions for vhost multi queue once we require 1.3.1+
11:14:07 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Use update_provider_tree from resource tracker https://review.openstack.org/520246
11:41:08 openstackgerrit Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Bump MIN_{LIBVIRT,QEMU} versions for "Rocky" https://review.openstack.org/558783
11:50:21 kashyap johnthetubaguy: ^

Earlier   Later