Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2019-02-28
12:43:02 openstackgerrit sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: SR-IOV Live migration indirect port support https://review.openstack.org/620115
12:43:02 openstackgerrit sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: Add get_instance_pci_request_from_vif https://review.openstack.org/619929
12:43:03 openstackgerrit sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: auto detach/attach sriov ports on migration https://review.openstack.org/629589
12:43:55 sean-k-mooney resolved minor merge conflict and rebased to master otherwise no other changes in that series
12:47:47 tacco hi there.. i have a issue with a redeployed hypervisor.. after deployment i see a "ResourceProviderCreationFailed: Failed to create resource provider" error when trying to start nova or migrating a instance to this hypervisor https://pastebin.com/zMHUUYEW
12:55:49 yaawang hi, could anyone please take a review on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/637834/, this a patch about libvirt cpu models select :-)
13:31:57 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: WIP context: Ensure templated connection URLs are rendered before use https://review.openstack.org/639607
13:33:10 artom sean-k-mooney, wait, we can have nested virt in nodepool now? mnaser, is vexxhost doing that now?
13:33:48 mnaser artom: we’re doing it but
13:33:53 sean-k-mooney artom: technically. the ci jobs will still try to disable it but we can renable it
13:33:59 mnaser I’m trying not to broadcast it too much
13:34:15 artom mnaser, oops, sorry :)
13:34:22 mnaser I want the jobs that use it are jobs that need to use it, not.. just do it can be faster
13:34:41 artom mnaser, well, NUMA live migration *needs* to use it :)
13:34:41 mnaser So Magnum is a case where it was useful and that’s why we added it
13:34:44 sean-k-mooney mnaser: i brought it up in the context of testing nuam aware live migration
13:34:55 mnaser Yeah then I’d be supportive of it
13:35:00 artom mnaser, sweet!
13:35:14 sean-k-mooney artom: as i said it would have to be non voting however
13:35:28 yonglihe mriedem: alex_xu: https://review.openstack.org/621474 updated per all comments. I have to have rest. have a good one everyone.
13:35:29 artom sean-k-mooney, yeah that's fine, we have to start somewhere
13:35:43 artom Even just being able to trigger a job manually that posts publicly would be a great first step
13:36:20 sean-k-mooney artom: if ovh/packet reenable it in the future we might be able to make it voting eventually
13:36:30 artom sean-k-mooney, baby steps :)
13:36:32 sean-k-mooney artom: well you could start by adding it to the experimental pipeline
13:36:52 sean-k-mooney that requires a comment ot trigger it
13:36:58 artom sean-k-mooney, wouldn't I have to start by moving whitebox to the openstack namespace?
13:37:08 sean-k-mooney yes
13:37:15 sean-k-mooney i ment after that
13:37:27 sean-k-mooney and you know after we write all the tests
13:37:41 artom Hey, I have some written already :)
13:38:04 sean-k-mooney did you look at the list i gave in the email
13:38:17 artom Yeah
13:38:19 sean-k-mooney feel free to automate those while i test them
13:38:52 artom sean-k-mooney, that'll kinda depend on whether the absence of func tests is a blocker for mriedem
13:39:04 artom If it is, those take priority before FF
13:39:15 sean-k-mooney yep
13:39:16 artom Other than that timing issue, I'll happily hax those up
13:43:03 sean-k-mooney artom: once you get the first functional test working i suspect the rest will be fairly staight forward
13:44:05 sean-k-mooney if you can add the functional test as a follow up that will reduce churn and make my testing eaisier
13:44:42 artom sean-k-mooney, yep, good idea. I can start with the tests in a new patch on top, and we can squash later
13:45:04 sean-k-mooney yep or even just keep it on top
13:45:46 sean-k-mooney squashing them to keep them with the feature code is nice but i dont think its required
14:00:24 sean-k-mooney mnaser: by they way do you use kvm on ubuntu 18.04 for vexhost?
14:00:33 mnaser sean-k-mooney: centos 7
14:00:38 sean-k-mooney ah ok
14:00:46 mnaser but we've managed to get the perfect combo for functional nested virt
14:00:51 mnaser thanks a lot to the kata containers folks
14:00:57 sean-k-mooney there is a bug in the ubunut 18.04 kernel that breaks nested virt
14:01:18 sean-k-mooney i had to replace mine with the mainline 4.20 kernel to fix issues
14:01:19 mnaser yeah our ci is worked out pretty often both by magnum and kata and their nested virt has been super stable
14:02:46 sean-k-mooney ya i went with ubuntu 18.04 because kolla-ansibel source deploys work better on ubuntu then centos in my previos experience
14:03:02 sean-k-mooney mnaser: do ye use openstack ansible for your production installation
14:03:07 mnaser sean-k-mooney: yeah
14:03:56 sean-k-mooney i must get around to checking that out at some point but since its working im not going to touch it untill i need to upgrade :)
14:10:04 mdbooth bauzas: Do you recall why rebuild is forced to be on the same host? Is it just because the way rebuild is written doesn't allow for a migration, or is it fundamental to the intent of rebuild? Or some other reason?
14:12:10 sean-k-mooney mdbooth: why would a rebuild ever need to migrate if the image does not change
14:12:21 sean-k-mooney if the image does change we hit the schulder
14:12:25 mdbooth bauzas: I ask because I was looking at the attach/detach root volume patches. They look fine, but shelve/unshelve is just distasteful, so having it as the only available option seems undesirable. Reading the original spec, it sounds to me like they want to rebuild on a different host...
14:12:30 mdbooth Which is an evacuate#
14:12:42 mdbooth Evacuate with a different root volume.
14:12:43 mdbooth Hmm
14:13:06 mnaser sean-k-mooney: be happy to help you get setup on OSA
14:13:19 mdbooth sean-k-mooney: Yes, we hit the scheduler but constrain it to return the original host or return NoValidHost
14:14:01 mdbooth Rebuild on a different host with a different root volume...
14:14:02 sean-k-mooney mnaser: its more just i have not taken the time to try it out. i learn how kolla ansible worked a few years ago and it served well enough for my personal needs
14:14:20 sean-k-mooney mdbooth: ah ok
14:14:30 bauzas mdbooth: because it doesn't ask for other resources, just for an image
14:14:43 bauzas unless you evacuate :)
14:15:05 mdbooth bauzas: Given that evacuate exists, I'm guessing most of this is already wired up.
14:15:55 bauzas yeah, that's actually the change in between evacuate and rebuild
14:16:09 mdbooth In fact: cold migrate with a different root volume.
14:16:10 bauzas evacuate is just the same rebuild path but with a different API action :)
14:16:18 bauzas hum no
14:16:23 bauzas cold migrate != evacuate
14:16:32 bauzas evacuate == rebuild(different_host)
14:16:47 mdbooth bauzas: Hmm, no. It doesn't consider a change of image.
14:17:14 mdbooth But I was thinking that you might have a root volume and ephemeral disks, in which case you might want to migrate them.
14:19:38 mdbooth bauzas: So, going back to the original question, why do we go to lengths to ensure that rebuild doesn't change host?
14:20:04 bauzas mdbooth: I'm not the rebuild specialist
14:20:30 bauzas some others hitted so many times issues with rebuild that they're more knowledgable than me, like... mriedem ? :)
14:20:38 mdbooth bauzas: Ah, sorry. I pinged you because you were co-author in a patch which added this constraint.
14:20:47 mdbooth mriedem was the other author.
14:20:52 bauzas knowledgable * (not sure it's a word)
14:21:44 mdbooth bauzas: Yeah, it's a word. Pretty sure that's not how you spell it, but I wouldn't have called you on it as I'm not 100% sure myself ;)
14:23:03 mriedem what is the question?
14:23:12 mriedem why doesn't rebuild migrate?
14:23:21 mriedem why do we validate the image against the scheduler when it changes?
14:23:28 mriedem because build is on the same host
14:23:37 mriedem why? because that's the way it originated
14:23:41 mdbooth mriedem: Yeah. Specifically why does it go to length to prevent a change of host even when calling the scheduler?
14:23:52 mdbooth mriedem: Right, that was my first guess.
14:24:04 mriedem then over the years it turned out it was buggy and to maintain the api contract but resolve those bugs we had to build stuff into it
14:24:11 mdbooth So there's no fundamental reason that it shouldn't, it's just that the control flow doesn't support it.
14:24:25 mriedem i wasn't around when rebuild was added
14:24:26 sean-k-mooney mdbooth: it calls the schudler to validate the current host is still valide as changeing the image means the image metadata could invaldate the current host
14:24:42 mriedem fwiw,
14:25:01 mriedem it's also got a latent bug where the image can change numa topology which does not send new numa topology limits to the compute service to do a resource claim
14:25:03 sean-k-mooney mdbooth: you can rebuild instance with sriov
14:25:18 mriedem because rebuild doesn't do any resource claim, because it was assumed that the flavor never changed (because it doesn't in the api) and the scheduler wouldn't be used

Earlier   Later