Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2019-06-03
11:29:03 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova stable/queens: Block swap volume on volumes with >1 rw attachment https://review.opendev.org/662340
11:43:11 openstackgerrit Boris Bobrov proposed openstack/nova master: Extract SEV-specific bits on host detection https://review.opendev.org/636334
12:03:19 openstackgerrit Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Simplfy test setup for TestNovaMigrations* tests https://review.opendev.org/662434
12:41:15 aspiers efried: after I implement the request filter thing for hw:mem_encryption and bbobrov addresses my feedback on his reviews, I think we'll be pretty close to being ready to hit the runway
12:58:33 alex_xu kashyap: after the instance live-migrated to _patched_ compute node, the guest won't get new cpu flag I thought, is it right?
12:59:45 mnaser alex_xu: afaik cpu flags will never change in a running host
12:59:52 mnaser s/host/vm/
13:00:11 alex_xu mnaser: yea, that is what I'm thought also
13:01:08 kashyap alex_xu: If you live-migrate the guest to a patched node, it is as effective as a cold-reboot, as migration serves the same role as guest cold reboot of re-exec()ing QEMU.
13:01:46 alex_xu kashyap: but we copy same domain xml in the destination node?
13:02:54 kashyap alex_xu: Yeah; and libvirt tries very hard to not enable any newer QEMU's features on migration *without* explicit request.
13:03:28 alex_xu kashyap: that means you need to restart your guest to get the new feature
13:03:39 alex_xu s/new feature/new cpu feature/
13:03:57 alex_xu on the _patched_ node
13:04:03 kashyap alex_xu: Yeah, the guest needs to be restarted at some point.
13:04:20 kashyap The point of live migration is that, it allows them to _start_ upgrading Compute nodes.
13:04:28 kashyap But we should actually determine all of this with a solid test:
13:05:03 kashyap (1) Two Compute nodes: Compute-Old and Compute-Patched
13:05:16 kashyap (2) Start a guest on Compute-Old, live-migrate it to Compute-Patched
13:06:42 kashyap (3) "See what happens" (the guest on -Patched should have same flags as on -Old) — until the guest is cold-rebooted
13:06:47 alex_xu i see your point
13:07:19 kashyap But in general, FWIW, I'd suggest live migrating when upgrading compute nodes
13:07:32 alex_xu i' ok with that
13:07:36 kashyap That's the reason why I took the live migration approach, and _then_ cold-start the guest.
13:07:45 kashyap That way, it reduces the impact
13:08:17 alex_xu another thought is I'm think we shouldn't suggest the way of upgrading compute nodes in that doc, the ugprading of compute nodes should be in the upgrade doc.
13:08:29 alex_xu but it should be fine
13:09:29 kashyap Yeah, I mentioned it for completeness' sake, as it made sense in that context.
13:10:34 alex_xu kashyap: I change to +2
13:13:38 kashyap alex_xu: Thank you
13:23:59 efried aspiers: ack. jfyi, there's gonna be a mktme spec coming down the pipe here pretty soon. You'll be pleased to see all the "make this generic" prep will be justified.
13:24:13 aspiers efried: oh, interesting! who's working on that?
13:24:17 aspiers you?
13:24:37 efried nah, I'll be reviewing it closely, but it'll be coming from someone else, not completely sure who.
13:24:53 efried I think it'll be in U though.
13:25:18 aspiers gotcha
13:26:21 aspiers efried: I'll only add to you to reviews from bbobrov which I think are ready. No point you burning time reviewing stuff where I have already identified some deficiencies which need addressing.
13:26:41 efried aspiers: I've been keeping my eye on those with the same philosophy :)
13:27:56 aspiers efried: Having said that, I did write a couple of comments addressed to you
13:28:18 aspiers but they can wait until the -1s are dealt with
13:29:19 kashyap efried: When you get time, the other day you said you might have some comments: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/661574/ ["Document mitigation for Intel MDS security flaws"]
13:29:53 kashyap efried: I'll wait to respin it until I get your comments; FWIW, it has a +2 from Alex
13:30:38 efried kashyap: ack, I'll look at that rn...
13:48:02 lyarwood johnthetubaguy: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/652800/ - thanks for the review, as this is already failing in the gate could you remove your +W so I could add a bug link in?
13:49:02 efried kashyap: passive aggressive +0 with lots of notes https://review.opendev.org/#/c/661574
13:49:44 efried lyarwood: You don't need johnthetubaguy to remove his +W; it'll clear if you just submit a new patch set.
13:49:57 efried ...I'm pretty sure? Now you got me doubting.
13:50:30 lyarwood efried: ah cool thanks, I'll try that now
14:04:57 kashyap efried: Heh, just looking. On the "SMT vulnerable" thing, yes, that didn't sit well with me either. Allow me to expand:
14:05:20 efried kashyap: Expand in the document
14:05:26 efried I believe you
14:05:32 kashyap efried: You will see "SMT vulnerable" when you have not disabled hyperthreading in the BIOS
14:05:40 kashyap (Yes, will certainly expand there, too.)
14:05:58 efried Yeah, so I don't know that that means. All I know is I see 'vulnerable' and that worries me.
14:06:17 efried but I don't know if "Mitigation: ... vulnerable" means I've mitigated the vulnerability
14:06:19 efried or what
14:06:36 efried maybe it'll be obvious to anybody who's actually qualified to be following this guide
14:06:40 efried if so, tell me that.
14:07:07 efried or maybe it would be clear by reading, from top to bottom, the link you referenced
14:07:17 efried which I did not do as part of my review :)
14:07:24 efried if so, you can tell me that too.
14:09:08 cdent fg
14:09:11 cdent oops ww
14:09:48 cdent I temporarily have more screen real estate than I can see in one glance
14:15:12 efried that sounds like a problem I want to have
14:18:08 edleafe Heh, I type into the wrong window at least once a day. Fortuantely, I don't type my passwords too often
14:23:09 kashyap edleafe: Hope you use a password manager :D
14:24:41 edleafe kashyap: Been using LastPass for 8 years now, and love it. But some VMs I use require passwords instead of SSH keys. LastPass doesn't work at a terminal :)
14:25:40 kashyap Nod; whatever works (and is not buggy).
14:26:03 kashyap efried: Whoops, missed the rest of the chat here. I'll respond to them all on the review.
14:39:12 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/queens: Add regression recreate test for bug 1830747 https://review.opendev.org/662774
14:39:13 openstack bug 1830747 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Error 500 trying to migrate an instance after wrong request_spec" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1830747 - Assigned to Matt Riedemann (mriedem)
14:51:27 efried kashyap, aspiers, mdbooth: Who's good with libvirt's use of lvm/cinder for swap devices?
14:51:41 efried ...or has the background to understand that fairly quickly
14:51:57 mdbooth efried: Me, probably
14:52:17 mdbooth *cinder* for swap?
14:52:19 efried mdbooth: Cool. Ima throw you on a review if you don't mind.
14:52:26 efried I'm not sure, really.
14:52:28 efried https://review.opendev.org/#/c/618621/
14:52:41 efried It's pretty raw at this point - I get the impression the contributor is very new to coding.
14:52:56 efried but perhaps you can provide guidance as to whether the fix is sane, going in the right direction.
14:53:17 kashyap efried: mdbooth indeed
14:54:23 efried mdbooth: Note that this came from ML thread http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-June/006807.html which I just responded to - but my response was only in the context of "here's how to get tests to pass".
14:54:35 efried I don't have the background to know whether the fix is any good.
14:55:05 mdbooth Ack. I have a short meeting in a couple of minutes, but I'll try to look at this properly within the next few hours.
14:55:11 efried thank you mdbooth
15:15:22 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Add extra logging to request filters https://review.opendev.org/657629
15:25:43 mriedem just fyi, dfw nodes are having issues this morning so you'll be rechecking if you hit one of those nodes
15:26:11 mriedem error message of "('Connection broken: IncompleteRead(0 bytes read)', IncompleteRead(0 bytes read))"
15:31:40 gibi mriedem: left a comment in https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1829479
15:31:41 openstack Launchpad bug 1829479 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "The allocation table has residual records when instance is evacuated and the source physical node is removed" [Undecided,Incomplete]
15:38:27 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Ensure that metadata proxy raises correct exception https://review.opendev.org/661480
15:47:03 efried thanks mriedem, seen a few of those :(
15:47:11 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Fix no propagation of nova context request_id https://review.opendev.org/662715
15:55:23 efried mriedem: Loading an instance from the db, setting expected_attrs makes it load those fields right away; if I don't do that, I can still access the fields, but they'll get loaded later, which is another db hit and therefore slow. Do I have this right?
15:56:36 mriedem correct
15:56:50 efried Cool, so https://review.opendev.org/#/c/662683/ is sane
15:56:50 mriedem e.g. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/657021/
15:57:15 mriedem i reported that bug but it should be hopefully what i said to do in the bug
15:58:12 efried oh

Earlier   Later