| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2020-02-21 | |||
| 19:40:46 | dansmith | but, cross that bridge later if we decide we need to do this | |
| 19:40:50 | efried | okay | |
| 19:41:00 | efried | like, maybe figure out what name sqlite autogenerates and use that? | |
| 19:42:26 | dansmith | oh, I just re-looked.. those are the postgres tests complaining | |
| 19:42:27 | dansmith | not the sqlite ones | |
| 19:42:32 | dansmith | I keep not seeing "postgres" | |
| 19:42:55 | dansmith | so yeah, have to make them match or teach the test not to care or something | |
| 20:25:21 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Enforce os-traits/SUPPORTED_STORAGE_BUSES sync https://review.opendev.org/709233 | |
| 21:01:48 | Sundar | dansmith: For the rescheduling part, https://review.opendev.org/#/c/631244/62/nova/conductor/manager.py@839, the call to _create_and_bind_arqs() must return the ARQs, so that they may be passed to build_and_run_instance(). The change to return the ARQs happens in a later patch -- the obe that bumps up RPCAPI: | |
| 21:01:49 | Sundar | https://review.opendev.org/#/c/631244/62/nova/conductor/manager.py@839 | |
| 21:02:10 | Sundar | Sorry, https://review.opendev.org/#/c/704227/14/nova/conductor/manager.py@1661 | |
| 21:03:01 | Sundar | Shall we do the create/bind for the rescheduling as a followup to 'Bump PCPI' patch? | |
| 21:03:57 | dansmith | Sundar: in the create patch you don't pass the arqs to the compute node until later in the rpc bump patch | |
| 21:04:47 | dansmith | so just make the reschedule path do the same thing now, which is create/bind, then don't pass them to build_and_run_instance() just as the normal path.. then in the rpc patch you can pass the ARQs to both cases of that call | |
| 21:05:10 | dansmith | that seems obvious to me, so maybe I'm missing something else that you're worried about? | |
| 21:05:42 | Sundar | dansmith: No, that just means we touch two patches instead of one. That is fine by me, however. | |
| 21:06:03 | dansmith | it also means we don't land a patch that is broken for reschedules :) | |
| 21:06:30 | Sundar | If we do it all in the 'bump rpcpai' patch, or later, we wouldn't break anything | |
| 21:06:38 | lucidguy | Anyone have experience starting up instances with over 1TB of memory? | |
| 21:06:45 | Sundar | But this is fine too. | |
| 21:06:49 | dansmith | Sundar: yes we would because your patches will land in order | |
| 21:07:03 | sean-k-mooney | lucidguy: it is not a commonly tested usecase no | |
| 21:07:36 | dansmith | Sundar: your rpc patch needs to handle the case where it isn't passed that new argument anyway, so you could punt on even updating the rpc patch until later if you want.. the create patch is more important | |
| 21:07:41 | lucidguy | There must be a way. RHEL OpenStack seems to support like 4TB of memory | |
| 21:07:55 | sean-k-mooney | lucidguy: not for once instance | |
| 21:08:27 | lucidguy | I'm pretty sure its per instance | |
| 21:08:31 | sean-k-mooney | that is likely the maxium limit that kvm/qemu report they can support not the practical limit | |
| 21:08:54 | sean-k-mooney | lucidguy: how much memory do you have on the host | |
| 21:09:04 | sean-k-mooney | and are you useing hugepage for the guest | |
| 21:09:16 | Sundar | dansmith: If somebody pulls in the patch series till 'create/bind', but not the later ones, we'll have a problem anyway -- because that would create/use resources in Cyborg but not free them, or handle reboots, etc. | |
| 21:09:31 | Sundar | Not sure if I am misunderstanding your point | |
| 21:10:24 | sean-k-mooney | lucidguy: https://access.redhat.com/articles/1436373#nova the limist are taken form base rhel but they are not tested as part of the product | |
| 21:10:38 | dansmith | Sundar: yes, which is why we're holding a -2 on the bottom patch so we can *try* to land them all together.. however the rule in nova is that all patches should be deployable whenever possible, so we're trying to limit the number of places where we land part of your set and it's broken | |
| 21:10:59 | Sundar | dansmith: Ok, not to belabor the point, I'll just do the 2-patch thing. | |
| 21:11:21 | dansmith | Sundar: I'd really like to not have your set as broken as it is in the middle, but also trying to be practical.. however, not adding more places where we don't handle something as basic as reschedules until later is not going the right direction | |
| 21:11:32 | sean-k-mooney | lucidguy: its likely that you can acigve the kvm limits set in https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel-kvm-limits but i suspect that to do that you both need tohave signifcantly more meory on the host and use things like hugepages | |
| 21:12:05 | lucidguy | sean-k-mooney: It lists a limit of 4TB | |
| 21:12:13 | dansmith | Sundar: I understand it's somewhat academic, which is why I'm not insisting on the existing isses | |
| 21:12:16 | dansmith | *issues | |
| 21:12:22 | lucidguy | I can't seem to start up an instance with 1.2TB | |
| 21:12:44 | sean-k-mooney | lucidguy: how much memory is on the host | |
| 21:12:45 | lucidguy | 1TB yes, 1.2TB, same image, kernel panic. | |
| 21:12:53 | lucidguy | 1.5TB | |
| 21:12:58 | sean-k-mooney | ok | |
| 21:13:26 | sean-k-mooney | if i rememebr correctly the kernel panic you posted before looked liek a kernel kvm bug | |
| 21:13:34 | lucidguy | It's driving me crazy, the amount of time I spent troubleshooting this. | |
| 21:14:07 | lucidguy | I've tride numerous kernels, upgraded the entire host. Still no luck. | |
| 21:14:24 | dansmith | Sundar: any chance you noticed my patch to fix creation of orphaned device providers? | |
| 21:14:29 | lucidguy | It's as if the problem resides with the Image itself. | |
| 21:14:49 | dansmith | Sundar: I'd guess it probably needs your blessing | |
| 21:15:09 | sean-k-mooney | lucidguy: its posible. unlikely but possible | |
| 21:15:24 | dansmith | Sundar: it came from me using devstack on a host with a FQDN which caused cyborg not to find the parent provider of the compute node, creating an orphaned provider, which required database surgery to fix | |
| 21:18:33 | lucidguy | Happy to tweak the image, if only I knew what was wrong. | |
| 21:19:10 | sean-k-mooney | lucidguy: what image are you using | |
| 21:19:30 | lucidguy | Right now I'm testing with Centos 7 generic cloud images | |
| 21:19:51 | sean-k-mooney | lucidguy: ok can you try grabing a ubunut cloud image | |
| 21:20:06 | lucidguy | I've tried that before also, same results | |
| 21:20:07 | sean-k-mooney | it will have a signifcalty differet kernel | |
| 21:20:23 | sean-k-mooney | ah ok | |
| 21:21:09 | sean-k-mooney | honestly i dont have the hardware to repoduce and since the error is in the qemu/kvm/kernel layers im not real sure how to help | |
| 21:21:13 | dansmith | I dunno about sean-k-mooney, but I'd say: prove you can boot this with 1.5TB in bare KVM, show us what config does that, and then we can look to see if nova can/should do something different | |
| 21:21:34 | dansmith | otherwise, this isn't really actionable by us or relevant for this development channel | |
| 21:21:39 | sean-k-mooney | ya that is a good point | |
| 21:22:10 | lucidguy | sean-k-mooney: Sometimes the system boots and I can see the kernel dump, no errors on the host. Other times it fails to boot and I see emulation errors on the hypervisor. | |
| 21:22:38 | lucidguy | And openstack puts in a paused state | |
| 21:29:25 | Sundar | dansmith: I did. Thanks. I have included that patch in my env but have nopt specifically tested it yet | |
| 21:29:49 | dansmith | Sundar: okay | |
| 23:13:05 | alex_xu | efried: gibi brinzhang I thought I +2 yesterday but it is not, hope it isn't too late | |
| #openstack-nova - 2020-02-22 | |||
| 00:22:07 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: trivial: Merge unnecessary 'NovaProxyRequestHandlerBase' separation https://review.opendev.org/705655 | |
| 01:53:56 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: trivial: Remove 'run_once' helper https://review.opendev.org/705656 | |
| 02:11:08 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Support re-configure deleted_on_termination in server https://review.opendev.org/580336 | |
| 07:15:28 | openstackgerrit | Adam Harwell proposed openstack/nova master: Add scheduler filter for routed_segments https://review.opendev.org/709280 | |
| 10:33:10 | openstackgerrit | Adam Harwell proposed openstack/nova master: Add scheduler filter for routed_segments https://review.opendev.org/709280 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2020-02-23 | |||
| 01:27:16 | gmann | efried: gibi: brin: sorry for not replying on friday, due to hospital visit. I am +1 on that approach (commented on spec). | |
| 04:49:36 | openstackgerrit | Adam Harwell proposed openstack/nova master: Add scheduler filter for routed_segments https://review.opendev.org/709280 | |
| 05:05:11 | openstackgerrit | Adam Harwell proposed openstack/nova master: Add scheduler filter for routed_segments https://review.opendev.org/709280 | |
| 08:35:06 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Add Cyborg device profile groups to request spec. https://review.opendev.org/631243 | |
| 08:35:06 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: ksa auth conf and client for Cyborg access https://review.opendev.org/631242 | |
| 08:35:07 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Create and bind Cyborg ARQs. https://review.opendev.org/631244 | |
| 08:35:07 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Define Cyborg ARQ binding notification event. https://review.opendev.org/692707 | |
| 08:35:08 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Compose accelerator PCI devices into domain XML in libvirt driver. https://review.opendev.org/631245 | |
| 08:35:08 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Pass accelerator requests to each virt driver from compute manager. https://review.opendev.org/698581 | |
| 08:35:09 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Enable hard/soft reboot with accelerators. https://review.opendev.org/697940 | |
| 08:35:09 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Delete ARQs for an instance when the instance is deleted. https://review.opendev.org/673735 | |
| 08:35:10 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Enable and use COMPUTE_ACCELERATORS trait. https://review.opendev.org/699554 | |
| 08:35:10 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Enable start/stop of instances with accelerators. https://review.opendev.org/699553 | |
| 08:35:11 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Block unsupported instance operations with accelerators. https://review.opendev.org/674726 | |
| 08:35:11 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Bump compute rpcapi version and reduce Cyborg calls. https://review.opendev.org/704227 | |
| 08:35:12 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Add cyborg tempest job. https://review.opendev.org/670999 | |
| 13:59:01 | openstackgerrit | Adam Harwell proposed openstack/nova master: Add scheduler filter for routed_segments https://review.opendev.org/709280 | |
| 19:04:01 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: trivial: Remove 'u' prefix from string https://review.opendev.org/709080 | |
| 19:47:13 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: setup.cfg: Various Python 3 fixes https://review.opendev.org/708824 | |
| 19:47:14 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: tox: Configure 'ignore_basepython_conflict' https://review.opendev.org/708830 | |
| 19:47:15 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Remove six https://review.opendev.org/708831 | |
| 19:47:16 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Bump to hacking 2.x https://review.opendev.org/708832 | |
| 19:47:17 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Random cleanups https://review.opendev.org/709081 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2020-02-24 | |||
| 01:13:39 | brinzhang_ | gmann: refresh default policy of os-instance-action API meet a problem, could you please review this patch [1]? I have a SPEC need this change. [1]https://review.opendev.org/#/c/707777/2/nova/tests/unit/policies/test_instance_actions.py@131 | |
| 01:21:35 | brinzhang_ | gmann, johnthetubaguy: There is an issue is the context.can(xx,xx, fatal=false), since fatal=False the unauthorized role cannot get the expect raise exception, so I would like to get your suggestion, and than fast complete this change | |
| 01:24:46 | brinzhang_ | gmann, johnthetubaguy: and another change is the destroy-instance-with-datavolume SPEC, and I will refresh the os-volumes API's default policy, because of I will add a new PATCH API to the os-volumes API. In order to use the new policy, I had to do this work in advance, please unstand me do this. | |
| 01:26:23 | brinzhang_ | gmann, johnthetubaguy: s/os-volumes API/os-volumes-attachments API | |