Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2019-01-09
12:06:57 sean-k-mooney what is your local branch name
12:07:11 sean-k-mooney that is where it pulls the topic from if you dont pass -t
12:07:35 alex_xu sean-k-mooney: jaypipes, yonglihe why cpu_thread_policy' is libvirt specific? re:https://review.openstack.org/#/c/612256/20/specs/stein/approved/show-server-numa-topology.rst@104
12:07:56 sean-k-mooney alex_xu: no other virt dirive supports it
12:07:58 jaypipes alex_xu: it isn't.
12:08:14 jaypipes alex_xu: the one I mentioned was emulator_threads_policy.
12:08:20 alex_xu no other virt driver support it, it doesn't mean libvirt specific, right?
12:08:33 sean-k-mooney jaypipes: cpu_thread_policy is only supported by libvirt also
12:08:34 alex_xu sean-k-mooney: not all the virt driver implement numa affinity also
12:08:47 jangutter sean-k-mooney: local branch name is: review/jan_gutter/bp/vrouter-os-vif-conversion
12:08:47 jaypipes alex_xu: "emulator" specifically refers to a libvirt/QEMU implementation detail :)
12:08:47 sean-k-mooney alex_xu: yes but at least 2 implement it
12:08:53 sean-k-mooney hyperv and libvirt
12:08:57 alex_xu jangutter: yea, I agree with you that
12:09:26 alex_xu jangutter: sorry, ping the wrong name...
12:09:30 sean-k-mooney jangutter: yep that is why it create that topic upstream :)
12:09:41 alex_xu hah
12:10:03 jangutter sean-k-mooney: aaaah.... sorry, I pasted the wrong link in.... let me repaste the correct link...
12:10:31 jangutter It added: Gerrit topic: https://review.openstack.org/#q,topic:bp/vrouter-os-vif-conversion,n,z where it should have added https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/vrouter-os-vif-conversion,n,z
12:11:21 sean-k-mooney jangutter: hum weird
12:11:50 jangutter sean-k-mooney: it picked the correct topic, but it generated a URL where "#q," should be "#/q/"
12:12:14 jangutter sean-k-mooney: maybe the link was valid on an older version of gerrit?
12:12:34 alex_xu jaypipes: we also should put it into the same level of 'nodes' field, right? sean-k-mooney mention that also
12:12:43 alex_xu we can't set cpu thread policy for each node
12:13:09 jangutter sean-k-mooney: sorry, just realised, I can probably ask this on #openstack-infra (facepalm).... it's been a looooong Monday.
12:13:46 sean-k-mooney jangutter: hehe dont worry about it but they will likely have a better answer
12:13:49 jangutter alex_xu: heh, no worries, I was confused for a bit, then I realised something autocompleted.
12:14:00 ygk_12345 sean-k-mooney: how to enable logging in libvirtd ?
12:14:11 jaypipes alex_xu: is that a fundamental problem with the underlying modeling? in other words, is this: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/objects/instance_numa_topology.py#L56 incorrectly placed on the NUMA cell instead of the InstanceNUMATopology object? :)
12:14:19 alex_xu jangutter: yea, I type tab too early :)
12:15:14 alex_xu jaypipes: interesting...we put that attribute into cell obj
12:15:31 alex_xu jaypipes: but we only have one extra spec to set cpu policy for the whole guest
12:15:47 sean-k-mooney jaypipes well there is no fundemental resone we could not do this per cell but we only support setting for the entire instnace
12:16:29 jaypipes sean-k-mooney: overkill? :)
12:16:36 sean-k-mooney totally
12:17:01 sean-k-mooney i mean at that point we might as well let people chose the cpus
12:17:34 sean-k-mooney i mean that is what they really wanted all along...
12:18:49 sean-k-mooney jaypipes: my guess would be we store it in the instance cell to not need to pass it as a paramater to fuctions later when calulating the pinning or some other reason liek that
12:18:56 alex_xu actually those policy can easy to get from the flavor extra spec
12:19:05 sean-k-mooney alex_xu: yes
12:19:55 sean-k-mooney alex_xu: wasing the main point of this spec that it would be reading the numa/cpu related extra specs and image metadata and presenting the compined view to the admin
12:20:08 sean-k-mooney *wasn't
12:20:41 alex_xu at least I don't want to the api user to parse the extra spec, and copy the parse rule which inside nova
12:20:57 alex_xu and yes, we have image meta for those policy also
12:21:00 jaypipes alex_xu, sean-k-mooney, yonglihe: easy to get sidetracked here. my bottom line recommendation: a) don't put emulator_threads_policy in the HTTP response AND b) put the cpu_threads_policy as an attribute at the same level in the HTTP response as "nodes" (like sean-k-mooney and alex_xu suggest)
12:21:31 sean-k-mooney jaypipes: sure that sounds resonable
12:22:38 alex_xu jaypipes: cool
12:27:16 sean-k-mooney jaypipes: alex_xu what is the process for specless blueprint by the way
12:27:23 sean-k-mooney jaypipes: alex_xu specifcally for https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/libvirt-disable-pmu-for-realtime-guests
12:28:07 alex_xu sean-k-mooney: get an approve in nova meeting? I guess
12:28:15 jangutter sean-k-mooney: Last time I proposed one, it went up as an agenda item on the Nova meeting.
12:28:38 sean-k-mooney ya i was going to add it for this weeks
12:29:29 sean-k-mooney if it gets punted to next cycle it wont kill me but it was a simple addtion i was going to work on after m2 as a 1 patch feature
12:41:31 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Fix format flavor-extra-spec-image-property-validation https://review.openstack.org/629311
12:41:34 gibi nehaalhat: I was able to mock the placement function you need http://paste.openstack.org/show/740847/
12:44:22 nehaalhat gibi: ok
12:46:12 kashyap gibi: Hi there; when you get a moment: I've answered your question on the review. What Martin posted on the review is the successful test evidence.
12:47:07 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: Remove link to placement configuration from nova config docs https://review.openstack.org/628185
12:47:07 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: Remove placement from nova install docs https://review.openstack.org/628184
12:47:08 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: Remove placement from contributor doc https://review.openstack.org/628186
12:47:56 kashyap gibi: The test results posted by Martin's matches my own (which I also posted in the review).
12:48:27 kashyap Thanks for reviewing!
12:48:42 gibi kashyap: ohh, then I have to read a bit more carfeully :)
12:49:23 kashyap Heh, no problem at all. It is low-level QMP log; so not everyone can make sense of it. I just added context as to what it means in the bug comment and the review
12:50:27 kashyap I didn't spell out my own results in the review explicitly; I merely _linked_ to several files. And I did the comparison of Martin's test with mine manually.
12:50:51 gibi kashyap: that context helps :) I'm +2 on that patch
12:55:19 kashyap Thanks a ton!
12:55:40 kashyap gibi: I'm getting the follow-up docs patch; just need to rST-ify my .txt file
12:55:41 gibi kashyap: I thank you for the effort
12:56:54 kashyap gibi: I'm hoping melwitt or someone can ACK the blueprint today / this week -- https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/support-qemu-native-tls-for-live-migration
12:57:41 gibi kashyap: could you please add it to the nova meeting agenda? that way I can make sure we won't forget it
12:57:57 kashyap gibi: Definitely; let me go find the agenda page
12:58:13 gibi kashyap: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova
12:58:35 kashyap Meanwhile, I added it to also to: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-stein-blueprint-status
12:58:38 kashyap Thanks!
13:01:58 gibi kashyap: cool
13:04:45 kashyap Alright, added it to the agenda (as part of: "Open discussion").
13:07:03 gibi thanks
13:28:25 openstackgerrit Paul-Emile Element proposed openstack/os-traits master: Add new traits for TPM support https://review.openstack.org/629299
14:18:18 openstackgerrit Yongli He proposed openstack/nova-specs master: add spec "show-server-numa-topology" https://review.openstack.org/612256
14:22:22 yonglihe Jay, alex_xu, sean, numa info spec revised. thank you, guys.
14:23:27 yonglihe 'show-server-group' spec, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/612255/11, this is quite small, hope it could make it.
14:26:59 openstackgerrit Iury Gregory Melo Ferreira proposed openstack/nova master: Rename Ironic jobs https://review.openstack.org/629504
14:27:12 sean-k-mooney two nits inline but i think the current version is largely fine.
14:27:19 sean-k-mooney yonglihe: ^%
14:40:30 jaypipes yonglihe: done
14:43:16 yonglihe got, working on that. Jay, thanks.
14:43:36 openstackgerrit Yongli He proposed openstack/nova-specs master: add spec "show-server-numa-topology" https://review.openstack.org/612256
14:43:52 yonglihe sean, updated. thanks.
14:59:17 openstackgerrit Yongli He proposed openstack/nova-specs master: add 'show-server-group' spec https://review.openstack.org/612255
15:00:09 yonglihe Jay Pipes, done
15:02:31 dpawlik Hello, could you review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/628956/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/628128/ ? thanks
15:04:55 sean-k-mooney dpawlik: does are queens stable backprot lyarwood ^ that might be something you might be interested in
15:50:06 openstackgerrit Yikun Jiang proposed openstack/nova master: Per aggregate scheduling weight https://review.openstack.org/628163
16:24:09 melwitt jaypipes: hey, I dunno if you saw my reply on the counting quotas from placement spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/509042/ but I think we can't consider removing user-specific quotas until we migrate to keystone limits + oslo.limit
16:25:21 jaypipes melwitt: ack, and I wasn't suggesting removing them yet, just that we should plan to just use keystone and the hierarchical projects stuff in future.
16:28:18 melwitt jaypipes: ah, ok. yeah, that is the plan when we move to keystone limits + oslo.limits user-specific quotas will be dropped as part of that. described in johnthetubaguy's spec if you're interested https://review.openstack.org/#/c/602201/
16:31:45 cfriesen so there's a review up for the os-traits portion of the emulated TPM stuff. Am I correct that we'd need a new version of os-traits to pick that up in nova?
16:32:00 jaypipes melwitt: ++
16:32:12 jaypipes cfriesen: yes.

Earlier   Later