| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2020-12-10 | |||
| 18:03:52 | sean-k-mooney | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/LTSEnablementStack | |
| 18:05:12 | JamesBenson | okay :-) | |
| 18:05:39 | sean-k-mooney | out of interst is tehre a reason you are not usin g2.04 | |
| 18:05:45 | sean-k-mooney | *20.04 | |
| 18:05:59 | sean-k-mooney | if its a fresh install | |
| 18:06:43 | JamesBenson | kolla doesn't support it I think fully | |
| 18:06:52 | JamesBenson | That's my deployment method. | |
| 18:07:16 | sean-k-mooney | yep i use kolla too. althouhg im currentoy using centos kind of | |
| 18:07:42 | sean-k-mooney | JamesBenson: depending on the release they have different levels of supprot for 20.04 | |
| 18:08:20 | JamesBenson | yeah, I'm on ussuri, I thought victoria was the first one to support 20 fully. | |
| 18:09:15 | sean-k-mooney | JamesBenson: yes it is | |
| 18:09:48 | sean-k-mooney | JamesBenson: i guess they have not had there offical release yet technically | |
| 18:09:49 | JamesBenson | ah, well, then I can definitely try that out. We do it all, including the OS deploy, in a CI/CD environment, so easy enough ;-) | |
| 18:10:15 | JamesBenson | yeah, not yet, soon I think | |
| 18:10:27 | JamesBenson | but for victoria, we do plan on pushing to ubuntu 20.04 | |
| 18:10:55 | JamesBenson | but I'll see about bumping the kernel, I've just been using what it deploys with, having tried to get it to a newer version. | |
| 18:11:32 | sean-k-mooney | the nested virt support signifcantly improve after kernel 4.19 so if you use it i always recommend having 4.19 and preferbly 5.1+ as you min kernel | |
| 18:12:11 | sean-k-mooney | JamesBenson: the hwe kernel works well for nested virt without needing the os bump | |
| 18:12:17 | sean-k-mooney | its 5.3 i belive | |
| 18:12:33 | JamesBenson | cool, have you ever tried low-latency kernels in openstack? | |
| 18:13:41 | sean-k-mooney | i have but my experice was tainted. i deployed with the low-latency kernel but i later found out that my system hangs which i attibuted to it was due to 3 failing dimms | |
| 18:13:45 | ganso | elod, bauzas, lyarwood: Hi! do you think those patches could be allowed to be backported from rocky to queens: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/580720 and https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/583715 ? | |
| 18:14:05 | sean-k-mooney | JamesBenson: so i have not really looked at it fairly. | |
| 18:14:32 | sean-k-mooney | JamesBenson: my deployemtn is just my home test/dev cloud so its currently runing the mainline 5.9 kernel | |
| 18:15:25 | sean-k-mooney | i was hoping to move to the 5.10 upstream lts and do a ussuri to victoria upgrade over the holiday break but that is still tbd | |
| 18:15:40 | JamesBenson | okay, looks like linux-lowlatency-hwe-18.04 is 5.4.0.53.59 | |
| 18:15:49 | JamesBenson | so maybe I'll try that out :-) | |
| 18:17:03 | sean-k-mooney | cool with that you wont need t o set the modeprobe paramter eitehr since its enabel by default | |
| 18:17:09 | ganso | elod, bauzas, lyarwood, nevermind I kind of got the answer myself by cherry-picking and seeing that queens is missing 2 other RequestSpec updates | |
| 18:17:46 | sean-k-mooney | ganso: we cant backport modifcation to any nova objects | |
| 18:18:07 | ganso | sean-k-mooney: thanks! | |
| 18:18:10 | sean-k-mooney | ganso: well we cant backport new fields | |
| 18:18:32 | sean-k-mooney | we can backport change that dont modify the serialsed format | |
| 18:20:12 | sean-k-mooney | ganso: you wanted this in queens | |
| 18:20:30 | ganso | sean-k-mooney: yes, in queens | |
| 18:20:57 | ganso | sean-k-mooney: since the fix requires the new field, we wouldn't be able to adapt it to queens, as I understand | |
| 18:22:09 | sean-k-mooney | that is correct unfortunetly however we coudl do something else possibly | |
| 18:22:33 | sean-k-mooney | if the places that need is_bfv hae a context and instnace tehy could use is_volume_backed_instance(ctxt, instance) instead directly | |
| 18:24:28 | ganso | sean-k-mooney: hmmm I will investigate this in the code. Thanks! Although, I'm aware it would make the backport with new code with extra risk, and then the stable maintainers may disagree with merging it | |
| 18:24:56 | sean-k-mooney | yes you would basically have to modeify https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/580720/6/nova/scheduler/utils.py | |
| 18:25:26 | sean-k-mooney | unfortunetly that does not have th instance or a keystone context | |
| 18:25:40 | ganso | oh I see | |
| 18:25:44 | ganso | yea, bummer | |
| 18:25:56 | ganso | thanks again sean-k-mooney ! =) | |
| 19:44:54 | melwitt | gibi, lyarwood: yes I can take over babysitting those patches once yall are gone | |
| 20:10:25 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for resource providers https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760240 | |
| 21:21:33 | JamesBenson | sean-k-mooney, one follow up question. Is there a setting (or benefit) to passing all of the CPU flags in the nova.conf? | |
| 21:50:29 | lyarwood | elod: https://review.opendev.org/q/I8f24b839bf42e2fb9803dc7df3a30ae20cf264eb lets see what that breaks | |
| 21:50:56 | lyarwood | melwitt: ack sorry had already gone, just wanted to check on the bandit thing and it looks like we might be able to get away with backporting the above to workaround it | |
| 21:53:01 | melwitt | lyarwood: is there a bug link for the bandit thing? sorry I fell too far behind with knowing what was going on there | |
| 21:55:14 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1907438 in OpenStack Object Storage (swift) "ERROR: Package 'bandit' requires a different Python: 2.7.17 not in '>=3.5'" [Undecided,Confirmed] | |
| 21:55:14 | lyarwood | melwitt: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-December/019292.html and https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1907438 | |
| 21:55:45 | melwitt | ah thanks | |
| 21:55:56 | melwitt | I don't know how I missed that on the ML | |
| 21:56:15 | lyarwood | there's so many fires at the moment, I wouldn't worry about it :) | |
| 21:56:27 | melwitt | you can say that again | |
| 21:56:30 | lyarwood | there's so many fires at the moment, I wouldn't worry about it :) | |
| 21:56:49 | melwitt | last night I almost tweeted "openstack ci right now is" with a mushroom cloud gif | |
| 21:56:58 | melwitt | hah xD | |
| 21:57:48 | melwitt | or the gif of elmo with the fire behind him | |
| 21:59:57 | lyarwood | hehe yeah both would still work right now :D | |
| 22:00:16 | lyarwood | ah cool the stable/victoria LC change made it to the gate | |
| 22:00:55 | melwitt | hot dog! | |
| 22:06:29 | melwitt | lyarwood: hm something I don't get though is how the LC change is having nova-multi-cell as non-voting if the disable voting change isn't in the gate? | |
| 22:08:31 | lyarwood | melwitt: different branches, I wrote the LC change switching nova-multi-cell to non-voting before gibi pushed his master change | |
| 22:09:03 | lyarwood | melwitt: I was going to pull it out and backport squash his into the stable/victoria LC fix but he said to just go on with the non-voting change | |
| 22:10:09 | lyarwood | melwitt: either way it's only to allow the LC change to land in stable/victoria, we will need to follow up once it's in | |
| 22:10:24 | melwitt | lyarwood: yeah but https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/766440 isn't approved? maybe I'm just missing something dumb | |
| 22:11:02 | melwitt | oh you squashed it. sorry /facepalm | |
| 22:11:02 | lyarwood | melwitt: oh I need to close that, I squashed that into the actual LC change, that's an old PS that isn't used anymore | |
| 22:11:10 | melwitt | yeah I see now. guhhhhh | |
| 22:11:19 | lyarwood | yeah sorry I've got dead changes all over the place from the last few days | |
| 22:11:32 | melwitt | no it's not your fault that I can't see things :) | |
| 22:12:57 | melwitt | ok, so iiuc we'll do this and then after gibi's change lands, we need to backport it to stable/victoria, then we re-enable voting | |
| 22:14:01 | lyarwood | yeah I think so | |
| 22:14:40 | lyarwood | okay bed time for me now, good luck with the gate :D | |
| 22:15:55 | melwitt | ok cool, gnight o/ | |
| 22:17:45 | melwitt | argh nova-ceph-multistore failed in the gate queue. of course it did | |
| #openstack-nova - 2020-12-11 | |||
| 00:40:41 | brinzhang | gmann: ack, that's what I did, just change the List Security Groups By Server API, dont change the deprecated apis. | |
| 00:40:44 | brinzhang | gmann: thanks | |
| 00:41:07 | gmann | brinzhang: +1, I will check your patches tomorrow. | |
| 00:42:32 | brinzhang | gmann: yeah, thanks, I have to add the needed unit tests, then submit it, and add you as a reviewer | |
| 00:42:57 | gmann | cool | |
| 06:59:02 | openstackgerrit | zhulipeng proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Fixed multipath residue when evacuating the VM https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/766675 | |
| 08:05:13 | gibi | good morning | |
| 08:06:53 | gibi | melwitt: thanks for the babysitt | |
| 08:08:59 | gibi | I see we were not lucky so far | |
| 08:27:19 | bauzas | gibi: good morning | |
| 08:29:16 | gibi | bauzas: o/ | |
| 09:02:33 | gibi | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/765749 is in the gate queue (again), fingers crossed | |
| 09:52:04 | elod | lyarwood: thanks for those backports \o/ we'll see whether everything is happy with it :) so there are now 3 possible solution for the bandit issue, so hopefully it'll be sorted out soon! | |
| 09:53:28 | elod | lyarwood: btw, I'm kinda @ PTO today and monday, but I'll be here time to time and try to look at things | |
| 11:22:58 | hemanth_n | Hi Nova team, can i get reviews on ussuri backport https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/761701 (Had initial review from elod with +2) | |
| 11:25:44 | lyarwood | hemanth_n: ack will look shortly | |
| 11:26:46 | hemanth_n | lyarwood: thanks | |
| 11:28:45 | gibi | lyarwood: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/765749 bounced from the gate again | |
| 11:29:23 | gibi | with the grande job failing on test_live_block_migration_paused | |
| 11:37:50 | openstackgerrit | Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Re-propose "Secure Boot support for KVM & QEMU guests" for Wallaby https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/759731 | |
| 11:38:25 | kashyap | gibi: stephenfin: --^ Addressed the small comments from PTG and review (adding the bit about traits; and adjusting version info, and couple of minor bits) | |
| 11:39:30 | kashyap | (Cc: Sean, Bauzas. Previous reviewers :-)) | |