| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2020-04-01 | |||
| 01:56:49 | gmann | brinzhang_: _update_volume_regular does not do any extra things what swap_volume does | |
| 01:57:36 | gmann | brinzhang_: https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/commit/c31de903dd73de1c0a41bcfe4c867daa6eb10f85/nova/compute/api.py#L4777 | |
| 01:57:45 | brinzhang_ | gmann: my concern is bdm = objects.BlockDeviceMapping.get_by_volume_and_instance(context, volume_id, instance.uuid), I am afarid this code failed | |
| 01:58:11 | gmann | brinzhang_: but that is what swap_volume also does. above link | |
| 02:02:51 | brinzhang_ | gmann: the old volume's bdm, will be copied to the new volume's bdm? | |
| 02:07:15 | brinzhang_ | gmann: do you think we can get this exception? https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/objects/block_device.py#L281 | |
| 02:09:55 | gmann | brinzhang_: it can but it can be raised from swap_volume also so updating failing on this first for update+swap request is ok. | |
| 02:10:07 | gmann | because there also we get old volume bdsm | |
| 02:10:09 | gmann | bdm | |
| 02:12:55 | brinzhang_ | if microversion > 2.85 to do update+swap for a new volume (instance_uuid is None, not attached to the instance), the bdm will be always failed, right? | |
| 02:13:14 | brinzhang_ | because we do update firstly | |
| 02:14:12 | gmann | brinzhang_: yeah and swap also fail for the same. | |
| 02:14:39 | brinzhang_ | so for microversion > 2.85, this feature is invalid, I think | |
| 02:33:52 | gmann | brinzhang_: on swap, bdm will be updated with new volume id. | |
| 02:34:21 | gmann | >2.85 either we fail during update or during swap is same thing. | |
| 02:36:58 | brinzhang_ | gmann: if we swap firstly, then update, maybe we can reduce the failed scenario, but looks also not very good for the user when microversion >= 2.85 | |
| 02:39:12 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Introduce scope_types in os-hypervisors https://review.opendev.org/715036 | |
| 02:39:19 | gmann | brinzhang_: that is problem what gibi commented.swap is rpc async call | |
| 02:39:57 | gmann | https://review.opendev.org/#/c/693828/22/nova/api/openstack/compute/volumes.py@481 | |
| 02:40:28 | brinzhang_ | yeah, I know this, I looked at they are talked records | |
| 02:44:17 | brinzhang_ | gibi: We considered swap rpc asynchronously, but we lost the high availability of the interface. Do you have any suggestions? | |
| 02:46:07 | brinzhang_ | gmann: I left comment with talked by us in the latest patch, I think dansmith and gibi can read that when they are wake up. and you can also reply someting in line. | |
| 03:13:34 | openstackgerrit | Luyao Zhong proposed openstack/nova master: support live migration with vpmem https://review.opendev.org/687856 | |
| 03:13:34 | openstackgerrit | Luyao Zhong proposed openstack/nova master: partial support for live migration with specific resources https://review.opendev.org/715362 | |
| 03:27:03 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Introduce scope_types in migrate server https://review.opendev.org/716130 | |
| 03:39:29 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Add new default roles in migrate server policies https://review.opendev.org/716132 | |
| 03:40:45 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Pass the actual target in migrate server policy https://review.opendev.org/716134 | |
| 03:46:55 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Delete ARQs by UUID if Cyborg ARQ bind fails. https://review.opendev.org/716186 | |
| 03:46:55 | openstackgerrit | Sundar Nadathur proposed openstack/nova master: Add release notes for Cyborg-Nova integration. https://review.opendev.org/716185 | |
| 03:57:31 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Pass the actual target in migrate server policy https://review.opendev.org/716134 | |
| 04:06:01 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Pass the actual target in unlock override policy https://review.opendev.org/716428 | |
| 04:06:59 | alex_xu | stephenfin: after reading the ffu discussion recently, I'm thinking maybe we can't remove this code https://review.opendev.org/#/c/714699/5 | |
| 04:17:35 | openstackgerrit | Brin Zhang proposed openstack/nova master: Allow PUT volume attachments API to modify delete_on_termination https://review.opendev.org/693828 | |
| 04:53:37 | openstackgerrit | Brin Zhang proposed openstack/nova master: Separate update and swap volume policies https://review.opendev.org/711194 | |
| 05:03:57 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Add test coverage of existing remote console policies https://review.opendev.org/716482 | |
| 05:10:07 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Introduce scope_types in remote consoles policy https://review.opendev.org/716483 | |
| 05:20:14 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Block unsupported instance operations with accelerators. https://review.opendev.org/674726 | |
| 05:32:53 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Add new default roles in remote console policies https://review.opendev.org/716484 | |
| 05:48:58 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Add test coverage of existing remote console policies https://review.opendev.org/716482 | |
| 05:49:30 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Introduce scope_types in remote consoles policy https://review.opendev.org/716483 | |
| 05:49:43 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Add new default roles in remote console policies https://review.opendev.org/716484 | |
| 06:04:26 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Add test coverage of existing rescue policies https://review.opendev.org/716486 | |
| 06:08:06 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Introduce scope_types in rescue server policy https://review.opendev.org/716488 | |
| 06:37:50 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Add new default roles in os-hypervisors policies https://review.opendev.org/715071 | |
| 06:38:29 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Add new default roles in rescue server policies https://review.opendev.org/716496 | |
| 07:01:42 | brinzhang_ | sean-k-mooney: gibi: what do you think of this releasenote change? https://review.opendev.org/#/c/716185/2/releasenotes/notes/accelerator-requests-6c9a6fef77ab776a.yaml@11 I am ok add this in releasenote for nova-cyborg interaction feature | |
| 07:02:47 | brinzhang_ | sean-k-mooney: gibi: do we need add these in the API guide? that the user can know what action they can do while the instance has some accelerators. | |
| 07:02:54 | brinzhang_ | s/while/if | |
| 07:17:07 | gibi | brinzhang_: do we have api guide for cyborg interaction? | |
| 07:17:36 | gibi | brinzhang_: at least I don't find it | |
| 07:17:51 | gibi | brinzhang_: but sure an api guide would be good to have | |
| 07:18:18 | brinzhang_ | gibi: that also what I want to see too. | |
| 07:18:43 | gibi | something similar to https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/api-guide/source/port_with_resource_request.rst | |
| 07:19:53 | gibi | brinzhang_: could you please note this api-guide request in the reno review | |
| 07:19:56 | gibi | ? | |
| 07:20:48 | brinzhang_ | gibi: I will asked Sundar in wechat, wait later :) | |
| 07:21:23 | brinzhang_ | gibi: I left some comments in https://review.opendev.org/#/c/693828/24, can you see fast? | |
| 07:22:38 | gibi | brinzhang_: will do in a couple of minutes (on a daily standup meeting now) | |
| 07:23:06 | brinzhang_ | gibi: thanks^^ | |
| 08:31:59 | gibi | brinzhang_: replied in https://review.opendev.org/#/c/693828 | |
| 08:32:26 | openstackgerrit | jayaditya gupta proposed openstack/nova master: Support for nova-manage placement heal_allocations --cell https://review.opendev.org/714459 | |
| 08:39:16 | brinzhang_ | gibi: I will looked into, thanks | |
| 09:04:50 | gibi | brinzhang_: also feedback on https://review.opendev.org/#/c/711194 | |
| 09:04:56 | jkulik | Could someone have a look at this, please? https://review.opendev.org/#/c/713863/ | |
| 09:08:12 | gibi | jkulik: could you please file a bug | |
| 09:08:40 | jkulik | gibi: if that helps, sure | |
| 09:08:51 | gibi | jkulik: also, is this something that worked well in the past and then broken by a certain release? | |
| 09:09:03 | jkulik | nope. never worked properly for us | |
| 09:09:07 | jkulik | we're on queens ;) | |
| 09:09:32 | gibi | jkulik: yes it helps as it feels like a bug, and bugs tend to be backported to stable branches. All these tracking is easier if there is a bug that connect the patches on different branches | |
| 09:09:55 | jkulik | ok, got it. will create a bug and mention it in the commit-message | |
| 09:09:59 | jkulik | thank you | |
| 09:10:39 | gibi | jkulik: I see. If you can write a sort reproduction steps in the bug report then I will try to repoduce it in my devstack to confirm the bug | |
| 09:15:09 | brinzhang_ | gibi: with https://review.opendev.org/#/c/71114 I also have some doubt, hope dansmith can have some good idea. | |
| 09:15:54 | brinzhang_ | gibi: A question, I will update the novalcinet to support v2.85, do I need to add all request parameter to the volume-update CLI? | |
| 09:16:41 | brinzhang_ | gibi: We just can update the delete flag, how about just only update the delete_on_termination to the volume-update CLI to support update volume? | |
| 09:17:25 | gibi | brinzhang_: I think it is OK to update the CLI to only offer d-o-t update | |
| 09:17:39 | gibi | that is the main use case for the end user anyhow | |
| 09:17:42 | brinzhang_ | other parameters, e.g. device, id, serverId, tag, that should keep same value, so I think we dont add that in the CLI | |
| 09:17:55 | gibi | I agree | |
| 09:18:02 | brinzhang_ | gibi: ok, I will do by this way, thanks | |
| 09:21:17 | bauzas | gibi: around for a question about reshapes ? | |
| 09:21:27 | bauzas | and your vgpu func test ? | |
| 09:25:14 | gibi | bauzas: sure, hit me | |
| 09:27:17 | bauzas | gibi: okay, so I wonder why you mocked https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/functional/libvirt/test_reshape.py#L96-L101 | |
| 09:27:40 | bauzas | gibi: you started two instances without having any supported types | |
| 09:27:53 | bauzas | gibi: so the instances wouldn't have any VGPU allocations | |
| 09:29:49 | bauzas | oh, but you created some VGPU inventories... | |
| 09:29:52 | gibi | bauzas: before that there is a placement update | |
| 09:29:55 | gibi | yeah | |
| 09:29:59 | gibi | that | |
| 09:30:37 | gibi | I guess this is a simplification | |
| 09:30:39 | bauzas | mmm ok | |
| 09:30:53 | gibi | in a good test the virt driver should report the new vgpu inventory | |
| 09:31:07 | gibi | I don't remember why I don't added a new fake driver that does that | |
| 09:31:13 | gibi | I guess there was complications | |
| 09:31:14 | bauzas | what I honestly wonder is whether your test is valid for a reshape | |
| 09:31:29 | bauzas | because when you restart nova-compute, you get a reshape, right? | |
| 09:31:50 | bauzas | in this case, when allocating an instance for this node, you get the nested RPs | |
| 09:32:45 | bauzas | I mean, we only have VGPU inventories on the root RP for nodes that were not restarted | |