| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2019-02-05 | |||
| 18:56:30 | dansmith | okay she changed a bunch of stuff and uploaded this morning, modulo one noted issue | |
| 18:57:02 | sean-k-mooney | as i said in the ether pad/before there is no reason the new object that carries the numa mapping form the dst to the source cant be used to carry info form teh souce to dest. we are modifying the migration object to hold the new object anyway so might as well use it of the page size too | |
| 18:57:39 | sean-k-mooney | artom: ^ assumeing we cant just get teh value for the instance_numa_toplogy object and use that in the numa topology filter already | |
| 18:58:16 | sean-k-mooney | anyway im going to cook dinner ill be back in an hour or two | |
| 18:58:21 | artom | sean-k-mooney, bon appetit | |
| 18:58:58 | mriedem | dansmith: i also didn't check to see if there was a functional test that stresses the all_tenants stuff with a down cell | |
| 18:59:01 | mriedem | but that'd be good | |
| 18:59:31 | mriedem | create a server in cell A with project A, create a server in cell B with project B, take down cell B and then list servers for all tenants | |
| 18:59:44 | artom | And actually it may be what's happening already in NUMATopologyFilter | |
| 20:15:49 | openstackgerrit | Jim Rollenhagen proposed openstack/nova master: ironic: partition compute services by conductor group https://review.openstack.org/635006 | |
| 20:26:18 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: mriedem care to +w https://review.openstack.org/#/c/626381/ ? | |
| 20:34:07 | mriedem | done | |
| 20:34:17 | mriedem | sean-k-mooney: are you going to work on backports? | |
| 20:34:49 | sean-k-mooney | for which patch | |
| 20:34:56 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/626381/ | |
| 20:35:15 | sean-k-mooney | sure i can back port that | |
| 20:35:56 | sean-k-mooney | am are there upstream backports for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/614167/20 | |
| 20:36:17 | sean-k-mooney | i will start backporting that and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/591607/25 too if not | |
| 20:37:21 | sean-k-mooney | haveing said that you mentioned that backporting https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bug/1751923+(status:open+OR+status:merged) was contovertioal? | |
| 20:45:15 | mriedem | i would personally prefer to let ^ simmer a bit before we go backport crazy on it | |
| 20:45:19 | mriedem | because it's very non-trivial | |
| 20:45:41 | mriedem | is a data migration and a change in behavior in how that periodic works in the compute service | |
| 20:45:45 | sean-k-mooney | ok ill leave it a couple of weeks and see if anything happens | |
| 20:46:42 | sean-k-mooney | actully ya downstream we tend not to backport data migrations | |
| 20:47:11 | sean-k-mooney | ill have to think how feasible it is. ill backport my own patch then in the interim | |
| 21:13:00 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add prep_snapshot_based_resize_at_dest compute method https://review.openstack.org/633293 | |
| 21:13:01 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add prep_snapshot_based_resize_at_source compute method https://review.openstack.org/634832 | |
| 21:13:01 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Add PrepResizeAtDestTask https://review.openstack.org/627890 | |
| 21:13:02 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add PrepResizeAtSourceTask https://review.openstack.org/627891 | |
| 21:34:29 | mriedem | dansmith: i left some ideas on how to split up the down cell patch | |
| 21:35:41 | mriedem | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urhJ81E-Bog | |
| 21:35:52 | dansmith | mriedem: okay, honestly I dunno how much I should harp on it, it's just.. really big | |
| 21:36:21 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/cross-cell-resize+(status:open+OR+status:merged) i'm obviously cool with splitting things up... | |
| 21:37:18 | dansmith | mriedem: you should bug me to look at some of those tomorrow | |
| 21:37:35 | mriedem | the first three are easy | |
| 21:37:43 | mriedem | i've got a -2 toward the bottom | |
| 21:37:52 | dansmith | mriedem: you should bug me to look at three of those tomorrow | |
| 21:38:01 | mriedem | ok | |
| 23:17:47 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: PCI: do not force remove allocated devices https://review.openstack.org/626381 | |
| 23:27:07 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: Add free for claimed, allocated devices https://review.openstack.org/616120 | |
| 23:27:07 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: Libvirt: do not set mac when unplugging macvtap vf https://review.openstack.org/624842 | |
| 23:27:08 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: Add get_instance_pci_request_from_vif https://review.openstack.org/619929 | |
| 23:27:08 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: Allow per-port modification of vnic_type and profile https://review.openstack.org/607365 | |
| 23:27:09 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: auto detach/attach sriov ports on migration https://review.openstack.org/629589 | |
| 23:27:09 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: SR-IOV Live migration indirect port support https://review.openstack.org/620115 | |
| 23:29:37 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/rocky: PCI: do not force remove allocated devices https://review.openstack.org/635071 | |
| 23:29:55 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/queens: PCI: do not force remove allocated devices https://review.openstack.org/635072 | |
| 23:38:31 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: PCI: do not force remove allocated devices https://review.openstack.org/635074 | |
| 23:38:56 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/ocata: PCI: do not force remove allocated devices https://review.openstack.org/635075 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2019-02-06 | |||
| 00:28:55 | artom | What takes precedence again? Flavor extra specs or image props? | |
| 00:30:09 | sean-k-mooney | that depends we generally now raise an exception if there is a conflict but original flavor took prescedence over image properties | |
| 00:31:15 | sean-k-mooney | im not sure we we have converted all conficts into exections currently but stephenfin did that for several of them | |
| 00:31:42 | artom | How are you still working o_O! | |
| 00:31:48 | artom | I'm happy you're here though :D | |
| 00:32:05 | artom | I'm asking because mem_page_size is in both | |
| 00:32:55 | sean-k-mooney | hehe i often take a few hours away around 7 my time and come back online for an hour or two around 10 ish | |
| 00:33:03 | sean-k-mooney | ya | |
| 00:33:32 | sean-k-mooney | so for mempage size if the flavor has set a spefici page size and the image does not agree its an error | |
| 00:34:21 | sean-k-mooney | if the flavoer was hw:mem_page_size=large or hw:mem_page_size=any and the image had hw_mem_page_size=1G that should be allow but i dont know if we support it or not | |
| 00:34:31 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Add prep_snapshot_based_resize_at_dest compute method https://review.openstack.org/633293 | |
| 00:34:32 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add prep_snapshot_based_resize_at_source compute method https://review.openstack.org/634832 | |
| 00:34:32 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Add PrepResizeAtDestTask https://review.openstack.org/627890 | |
| 00:34:33 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Move finish_resize.(start|end) notifications to helper method https://review.openstack.org/635079 | |
| 00:34:33 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Add PrepResizeAtSourceTask https://review.openstack.org/627891 | |
| 00:34:34 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Add finish_snapshot_based_resize_at_dest compute method https://review.openstack.org/635080 | |
| 00:35:09 | artom | sean-k-mooney, so based on unit tests it looks like mem_page_size in image is outright forbidden... | |
| 00:35:19 | mriedem | artom: i've always though image overrides flavor since the user can sometimes upload their own images | |
| 00:35:35 | mriedem | stephenfin might think otherwise as well since i think he's written something up about this brfeore | |
| 00:35:37 | mriedem | *before | |
| 00:36:10 | sean-k-mooney | well the user should not be able to overide the admin but if ther is no conflict then its fine | |
| 00:36:13 | artom | mriedem, hrmm, doesn't look like that's universally true | |
| 00:36:19 | artom | sean-k-mooney, mriedem, https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/f7252b586b4b9f5a098fedfa27715b8f7e662af6/nova/tests/unit/virt/test_hardware.py#L2253-L2264 | |
| 00:36:32 | artom | To me that reads as we bail if there's a page size in image props | |
| 00:36:56 | sean-k-mooney | artom: https://github.com/openstack/glance/blob/master/etc/metadefs/compute-guest-memory-backing.json | |
| 00:37:40 | sean-k-mooney | artom no in test_get_requested_mempages_pagesize_from_image_forbidden | |
| 00:38:18 | sean-k-mooney | the flavor is hw:mem_page_size=small so not hugepages but the image asks for 2m hugepages so that is not allowed because teh admin said no | |
| 00:39:00 | sean-k-mooney | test_get_requested_mempages_pagesize_from_image_forbidden2 fails befause for the image to be allow to ask for hugepages teh flaovr must have hw:mem_page_size=large or any | |
| 00:39:24 | artom | Ah, so https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/f7252b586b4b9f5a098fedfa27715b8f7e662af6/nova/virt/hardware.py#L1120 exists | |
| 00:39:36 | sean-k-mooney | artom: basically you can only aske for a specific page size via the image if the admin said it was ok in the flavor | |
| 00:39:41 | sean-k-mooney | at least that was the intent | |
| 00:40:54 | sean-k-mooney | artom https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/f7252b586b4b9f5a098fedfa27715b8f7e662af6/nova/virt/hardware.py#L1169-L1170 | |
| 00:42:18 | sean-k-mooney | artom: the idea wa that if the admin wanted to supprot hugepage guest they would only ever set hw:mem_page_size=large. and if the tenant cared about the size of the hugepage they would then say so in the image | |
| 00:42:59 | artom | sean-k-mooney, aha, that makes sense | |
| 00:44:09 | artom | Concretely, in our live migration claim case, it looks like we'll have to override both with the actual pagesize on the source host | |
| 00:44:21 | artom | Somehow | |
| 00:46:26 | sean-k-mooney | artom: the instance_numa_topology object has the pagesize | |
| 00:46:27 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/f7252b586b4b9f5a098fedfa27715b8f7e662af6/nova/objects/instance_numa_topology.py#L51 | |
| 00:46:42 | sean-k-mooney | so when you are claiming the memory for the instance jsut pull it out of that | |
| 00:46:47 | artom | sean-k-mooney, yeah, that wasn't what I was bugging on | |
| 00:47:23 | artom | So actually, because https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/f7252b586b4b9f5a098fedfa27715b8f7e662af6/nova/virt/hardware.py#L1168-L1170, if we set a numerical pagesize in the flavor, it'll override anything in the image | |
| 00:47:27 | artom | OK, I'm good | |
| 00:47:48 | sean-k-mooney | artom: yes but we should not mess with the flavor | |
| 00:47:54 | sean-k-mooney | or the image | |
| 00:48:04 | sean-k-mooney | just keep it as a seperate value | |
| 00:48:12 | artom | sean-k-mooney, not on the original, but if we deepcopy it we can do whatever we want :) | |
| 00:48:32 | artom | I know it's ugly, but I'd rather not dive into the claims code to make it understand a separate pagesize | |
| 00:48:57 | sean-k-mooney | its a nova object wich is a ovo so you all have to reset the fields to make shour it does not get persited back into the db in some cases | |
| 00:50:48 | sean-k-mooney | artom: well throw up a poc and then we can see what it looks like | |
| 00:50:57 | artom | sean-k-mooney, yep | |
| 01:39:01 | sean-k-mooney | night all o/ | |