| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2019-09-05 | |||
| 22:10:53 | efried | and that's the default behavior. | |
| 22:11:01 | mriedem | yeah | |
| 22:11:09 | dansmith | correct | |
| 22:11:20 | efried | ? | |
| 22:11:20 | efried | if 'metadata' in res_obj: | |
| 22:11:20 | efried | and you check with | |
| 22:11:23 | dansmith | if there's really a reason to have it =None then it _should_ be nullable, | |
| 22:11:43 | dansmith | but for something like this, the presence of the metadata object isn't the thing you want, it's what is inside | |
| 22:11:44 | mriedem | efried: yup | |
| 22:12:00 | dansmith | so if you always make these things nullable=True, then you always have to check first | |
| 22:12:11 | dansmith | like, if that was what it was intended to be in the first place, you'd have to do: | |
| 22:12:42 | dansmith | if foo.metadata: if parse(foo.metadata): do_something(foo.metadata) | |
| 22:12:49 | dansmith | when really you want to just be able to do something like | |
| 22:13:03 | dansmith | if foo in resources.metadata | |
| 22:13:05 | dansmith | or something like that | |
| 22:13:15 | dansmith | take a degree of freedom out of the thing by always making it present | |
| 22:13:22 | mriedem | if you like mega conditionals https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/scheduler/host_manager.py#L760 | |
| 22:13:49 | efried | egads | |
| 22:13:50 | mriedem | RequestSpec is i think the king of "if a and b and c and not d" | |
| 22:13:51 | dansmith | because later when you have two versions out there, ambiguity is the enemy | |
| 22:15:21 | efried | cool, thanks for the primer. This was easier than having 12h between each call & response. | |
| 22:15:40 | dansmith | not for me | |
| 22:15:57 | mriedem | time to start a versioned objects FAQs doc | |
| 22:16:01 | dansmith | easier to ignore with 12h latency | |
| 22:16:37 | dansmith | on my blog, which is apparently the canonical source for nova RPC information | |
| 22:16:51 | openstackgerrit | Adam Spiers proposed openstack/nova master: Apply SEV-specific guest config when SEV is required https://review.opendev.org/644565 | |
| 22:16:59 | mriedem | heh, you know it | |
| 22:17:36 | mriedem | pulling stuff from slides 5-8 here (which is a lot based on the blog) into nova docs might be good to start https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1YeXlL1EPaZTRkbJDywJKBrugXz-Amri3fIQk2ctOugs/edit?usp=sharing | |
| 22:18:17 | efried | dustinc: you around? | |
| 22:18:35 | mriedem | note slide 11 :) | |
| 22:18:47 | dustinc | efried: yeah what’s up? | |
| 22:18:57 | efried | dustinc: I think node.list patch has a regression -- did you see https://review.opendev.org/#/c/656027/29/nova/virt/ironic/driver.py@690 | |
| 22:19:14 | dansmith | mriedem: lol | |
| 22:19:41 | openstackgerrit | Adam Spiers proposed openstack/nova master: Reject live migration and suspend on SEV guests https://review.opendev.org/680158 | |
| 22:19:51 | efried | dustinc: if that's the case, it means we're missing test coverage in the CI job and we should add it. | |
| 22:20:17 | dustinc | efried: haven’t really been paying attention to those last two with the providers.yaml work. I will check it out. | |
| 22:20:37 | efried | dustinc: this is one already merged, so it takes priority over feature work. | |
| 22:21:19 | efried | dustinc: on inspection, it makes sense I think, because we're asking the API for the instance_id field instead of the instance_uuid field. | |
| 22:21:36 | efried | this is a pain point with the sdk translation of uuid->id everywhere. | |
| 22:21:48 | efried | mordred: fyi | |
| 22:22:17 | dustinc | efried oh I see, on it now | |
| 22:22:25 | efried | so basically, queries *into* the API need to say uuid, but processing the results on the way out need to say id. | |
| 22:22:26 | efried | I think. | |
| 22:22:54 | efried | dustinc: You may want to ask for help in -ironic to add coverage to that CI job. Unless you already have it wired. I wouldn't know where to begin. | |
| 22:22:58 | openstackgerrit | Adam Spiers proposed openstack/nova master: Enable booting of libvirt guests with AMD SEV memory encryption https://review.opendev.org/666616 | |
| 22:23:18 | aspiers | efried: OK, I'm done for the last time ... until next time ^^^ | |
| 22:23:26 | aspiers | couple of very simple new patches in there | |
| 22:24:14 | aspiers | and more thorough tests than ever | |
| 22:27:21 | efried | dustinc: looks like it may be just tempest with configs to set up the ironic driver; which would mean that tempest in general doesn't exercise list_instances... | |
| 22:39:59 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: doc: cleanup references to conductor doc https://review.opendev.org/680535 | |
| 23:17:17 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Bump min for oslo.service & .privsep to fix SIGHUP https://review.opendev.org/679974 | |
| 23:28:16 | aspiers | Is it possible to configure zuul to fail early if certain jobs fail? | |
| 23:28:54 | aspiers | For example 680296,1 has already failed openstack-tox-pep8 but all the other jobs are still running, taking up valuable CI resources | |
| 23:29:17 | aspiers | In fact there's a large CI backlog which would probably vanish quickly if this were possible | |
| 23:31:21 | aspiers | Hmm, seems to be possible via pipeline.failure | |
| 23:36:19 | openstackgerrit | Nathan Kinder proposed openstack/nova master: Allow TLS ciphers/protocols to be configurable for console proxies https://review.opendev.org/679502 | |
| 23:45:56 | dustinc | efried: You still online? | |
| 23:51:17 | openstackgerrit | Dustin Cowles proposed openstack/nova master: Use fields="instance_uuid" when calling Ironic API https://review.opendev.org/680542 | |
| 23:52:26 | openstackgerrit | Dustin Cowles proposed openstack/nova master: Use fields="instance_uuid" when calling Ironic API https://review.opendev.org/680542 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2019-09-06 | |||
| 00:45:28 | brinzhang | amotoki: What do you mean https://review.opendev.org/#/c/673485/3/novaclient/v2/shell.py@2609 ? | |
| 00:46:33 | amotoki | brinzhang: sorry, I looked some wrong line when scrolling the review... I will add a comment. | |
| 00:46:35 | brinzhang | as mriedem said, this patch do the ``nova volume-attach`` CLI, not server create | |
| 00:46:50 | brinzhang | amotoki: np | |
| 00:48:41 | brinzhang | amotoki: And I want to keep the option delete-on-termination in novaclient with '--delete-on-termination', but I am not sure use this in OSC is fine? | |
| 00:49:29 | brinzhang | amotoki: As sain in PS3, how about add enable/disable befor the 'delete-on-termination', what do you think? | |
| 00:49:47 | amotoki | brinzhang: sounds good for --delete-on-termination. | |
| 00:50:16 | brinzhang | amotoki: I will keep --delete-on-termination in novaclient. | |
| 00:51:26 | amotoki | brinzhang: if we need an option to specify 'delete_on_termination=False', I see several options: (a) --delete-on-termination / --no-delete-on-termination (b) --enable-delete-on-termination/--disable-delete-on-termination (c) --delete-on-termination / --keep-on-termination | |
| 00:52:04 | amotoki | brinzhang: thought? | |
| 00:53:36 | brinzhang | amotoki: I tend to (b) --enable-delete-on-termination/--disable-delete-on-termination | |
| 00:54:57 | brinzhang | amotoki: I will rebase the novaclient patch, could please review the OSC patch, and you can leave that comment in it? Or after I rebased it. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/673725/6 ^^ | |
| 00:57:36 | amotoki | brinzhang: sure. | |
| 00:58:01 | amotoki | brinzhang: btw, is there any compute API ref corresponding to this? | |
| 01:01:27 | brinzhang_ | amotoki: is this what dou you want?https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/#attach-a-volume-to-an-instance | |
| 01:02:00 | amotoki | brinzhang_: but I cannot find information on delete_on_termination. | |
| 01:04:13 | brinzhang_ | amotoki: this field in this compute API is new, after https://review.opendev.org/#/c/673133/ is merged, you can look at it. | |
| 01:04:43 | amotoki | brinzhang_: thanks. It would help me when reviewing CLI patch. | |
| 01:05:47 | brinzhang_ | amotoki: but in create server API in request body(block_device_mapping_v2.delete_on_termination (Optional)) has this field, you can reference https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=create-server-detail#create-server | |
| 01:06:24 | amotoki | brinzhang_: mainly I would like to check the default value of the option. | |
| 01:08:00 | openstackgerrit | Akira KAMIO proposed openstack/nova master: VMware: disk_io_limits settings are not reflected when resize https://review.opendev.org/680296 | |
| 01:08:50 | gmann | amotoki: this one - https://review.opendev.org/#/c/673133/16/nova/api/openstack/compute/volumes.py L342 | |
| 01:10:05 | amotoki | gmann: thanks. | |
| 01:37:50 | openstackgerrit | Brin Zhang proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Microversion 2.79: Add delete_on_termination to volume-attach API https://review.opendev.org/673485 | |
| 01:39:24 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Handle VirtDriverNotReady in _cleanup_running_deleted_instances https://review.opendev.org/679473 | |
| 01:41:51 | openstackgerrit | Brin Zhang proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Microversion 2.79: Add delete_on_termination to volume-attach API https://review.opendev.org/673485 | |
| 03:06:39 | openstackgerrit | Akihiro Motoki proposed openstack/nova master: PDF documentation build https://review.opendev.org/676730 | |
| 06:10:23 | openstackgerrit | Michael Davies proposed openstack/os-traits master: Add support for ppc64le platforms https://review.opendev.org/680580 | |
| 06:31:52 | openstackgerrit | ya.wang proposed openstack/nova master: vCPU model selection https://review.opendev.org/670298 | |
| 06:31:53 | openstackgerrit | ya.wang proposed openstack/nova master: Support reporting multi CPU model traits https://review.opendev.org/670300 | |
| 06:31:53 | openstackgerrit | ya.wang proposed openstack/nova master: Add compatibility checks for CPU mode and CPU models and extra flags https://review.opendev.org/670299 | |
| 07:14:22 | gibi | bauzas: hi! I'm about the start changing the bottom of the bw series https://review.opendev.org/#/c/656422 Yesterday we agreed with mriedem that the bottom can be fixed in a follow up, so if you are about to +A that patch then I will go with the followup. If not then I go and fix the patch itself instead | |
| 07:14:46 | bauzas | gibi: yup, I was reviewing and I saw matt's comments | |
| 07:14:51 | bauzas | gibi: as you want | |
| 07:15:18 | bauzas | gibi: I'm not done with reviewing your bottom change but I'm absolutely not opposed to a followup | |
| 07:15:22 | gibi | bauzas: then please continue reviewing it and I do a follow up | |
| 07:15:29 | bauzas | cool | |
| 07:15:34 | gibi | bauzas: and thank you :) | |
| 07:15:45 | bauzas | (on a train with limited connection but whatever :) ) | |
| 07:16:46 | gibi | fun times | |
| 07:16:58 | cervigni | os summit? | |