Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2021-10-20
13:59:06 bauzas (UTC)
13:59:28 stephenfin bauzas: just another PTG so
13:59:29 stephenfin :)
13:59:36 belmoreira bauzas 3pm utc works for me. thanks
14:00:41 bauzas just hope melwitt can be present at this time
14:00:56 bauzas belmoreira: ack, will flip the sessions
14:11:49 bauzas stephenfin: we'll do neutron things until 3pm UTC
15:07:48 bauzas dansmith: are you available ? belmoreira is discussing about moving instances between projects and we're talking of os-chown
15:08:12 dansmith bauzas: not right this moment, but I can try to join soon
15:08:19 bauzas dansmith: cool, appreciated.
15:11:24 dansmith bauzas: actually, this next topic is something I have to stay for, so it'll be a bit yet
15:11:37 bauzas ok
15:11:47 bauzas no worries
15:14:35 dansmith bauzas: I'm here for 15 mins
15:14:49 bauzas ta
15:17:34 dansmith which line is the vnc proxy thing?
15:17:48 stephenfin dansmith: 394
15:18:02 dansmith ah, in the "after 3pm" thing
15:18:32 stephenfin yeah, I've lost track of how we're picking stuff/what we've covered :)
15:58:06 bauzas side note: Jabra Evolve 2 65 are terrible headsets for a day long wearing them
15:58:29 bauzas my ears are pretty done with it
15:58:59 bauzas stephenfin: yeah, we cherry-picked topics
15:59:24 bauzas I don't wanna move topics too much as it's also confusing
17:26:48 bauzas brinzhang: when you're up, tell me when you want to discuss the cyborg suspend/resume spec ? we can do this either this Thursday 1pm or Friday 1pm if that suits your TZ
17:27:48 bauzas for the moment, placing it at the top of the discussions we have left so it would be discuss this at 1pm, but we can punt it for later
17:28:40 bauzas to nova folks, I flipped topics so the agenda should reflect the first topics to discuss, starting at L357
#openstack-nova - 2021-10-21
00:22:54 brinzhang bauzas:hi, about the suspend/resume an accelerator instance feature, there is no spec, before we completed rebuild/evacuate, shelve/unshelve, I just want to continue
00:24:33 brinzhang bauzas: today, I am not sure that time(1pm) which is ok for me, but if possiable, I think I can, thanks
08:29:32 bauzas brinzhang: OK, then we'll start with your topic, but in case you're not around, I'll punt it until tomorrow
08:30:39 gibi morning Nova
10:09:43 sean-k-mooney for what its worth i think it make sense to proceed with suspend/resume for cyborg without a spec in the same way i hope to do the same for vdpa
10:10:29 sean-k-mooney its just the completion of the existing work which does nto really require much design work so i think specless blueprint and code review should be suffincet in both cases
10:18:11 gibi I'm ok with a specless bp too
12:11:50 bauzas reminder : nova sessions start in 50 mins on https://www.openstack.org/ptg/rooms/newton
12:15:46 bauzas sean-k-mooney: gibi: yup I agree with both of you but given brinzhang asked to discuss for it, let's wait until we do
12:31:44 gibi sure
12:37:33 tbarron bauzas: do you have a window (however large) when you are targeting the virtios topic? manila folks plan to discuss at 23:15 this morning (I know Lee is out of course)
12:37:40 frickler with virt_type=qemu on qemu>=5.2 (bullseye, jammy, centos-stream-8) instances (i.e. rss of the qemu process) seem to use 3x as much ram as the flavor allocates, has anyone seen this behaviour before? it is causing failures in devstack CI with things just going OOM
12:39:06 tbarron bauzas: 13:15 :)
12:39:30 tbarron which isn't morning for lots of people, I know
12:43:46 sean-k-mooney frickler: no but i do know that in qemu 6.0 the -m attibute is nolonger required when using mem-backing args
12:44:09 sean-k-mooney frickler: so in 5.2 where we were seeing libvirt use both way that was still required
12:45:35 sean-k-mooney frickler: actully that chang is in 6.1 https://wiki.qemu.org/ChangeLog/6.1#Memory_backends
12:46:10 sean-k-mooney frickler: so the qemu command line generated form the libvirt xml that i looked at before i think was correct so this sound like a qemu bug
12:57:31 bauzas tbarron: others, sorry was taking a bit of timeoff before we start
12:57:41 frickler sean-k-mooney: do you have some contact at qemu to push that to?
12:57:50 bauzas tbarron: not sure we'll have time to discuss about the Manila spec today
12:58:12 bauzas tbarron: we can start to discuss it for tomorrow 1pm (or later if you prefer)
12:58:37 sean-k-mooney frickler: good question kashyap: do you know who could help root cause this
12:59:02 kashyap What's the context? /me catches up. (In a meeting now)
12:59:04 sean-k-mooney kashyap: context is that qemu on debian seams to be using 2-3x the ram that is allocated to the vm
12:59:13 kashyap What version of QEMU?
12:59:16 sean-k-mooney 5.2
12:59:32 kashyap Fairly recent (Dec 2020)
12:59:52 sean-k-mooney kashyap: we are seeign this result in OOM issues in the ci hence frickler concern
12:59:56 tbarron bauzas: *bit* is right :D. 1300UTC tomorrow would be great, manila sessions don't start till 1400.
13:00:26 stephenfin I'll be 20/30 minutes late to the PTG sessions again today
13:00:46 kashyap frickler: Very odd; is this something sudden? I can check w/ the upstream, but before that, I'd need a bug (with proper details)
13:01:05 kashyap frickler: Oh, wait
13:01:26 kashyap frickler: virt_type=qemu is already deadly slow: as you might know it's not using any hardware acceleration
13:02:24 kashyap frickler: What is the host OS? (I'm assuming this is a nested env; i.e. the "host" is a level-1 guest. And the baremetal is some cloud-vendor provided)
13:02:39 bauzas nova sessions start by now, people can join with https://www.openstack.org/ptg/rooms/newton
13:02:57 kashyap frickler: I'd need these, to start with: QEMU version and the complete QEMU command-line of the guest. You'll find it here: /var/log/libvirt/qemu/instance-yyyyyyyy.log
13:04:54 bauzas tbarron: okay then let's discuss this at 1300UTC tomorrow
13:05:30 bauzas sean-k-mooney: joing
13:05:33 bauzas joining ?
13:06:30 sean-k-mooney yes sorry be right there
13:07:07 bauzas stephenfin: are you able to join us ?
13:07:21 bauzas stephenfin: we would discuss about your topics next
13:24:39 stephenfin bauzas: in 10 minutes
14:16:17 bauzas dansmith: fyi, we're discussing the healthcheck proposal (as you provided comments in there)
14:18:01 dansmith bauzas: arg, okay, in the tc right now
14:18:57 bauzas dansmith: I guess we collected your thoughts
14:20:08 dansmith bauzas: I can be there in a few I think
14:20:32 bauzas ok we'll continue to discuss the design before you join
14:32:10 bauzas dansmith: tl;dr:
14:32:32 bauzas 1/ discuss a library like oslo.healthcheck providing the HT knobs
14:32:46 bauzas 2/ having a global cache object knowing the state of the service
14:33:09 bauzas 3/ (I can't remember it, sean-k-mooney ? )
14:33:27 bauzas oh, the API thing
14:34:59 sean-k-mooney 3 was allow /healtcheck at the api to call the helath check for that api process
14:35:17 bauzas yeah, I remembered it :)
14:47:45 frickler kashyap: https://paste.opendev.org/show/810150/ we know that qemu is slow, but we cannot use kvm reliably in CI. happening for different host OSes (i.e. what devstack runs in, no idea what host OS is in place on the cloud side)
14:51:04 kashyap Exactly; that's the peril here w/ nested probs ... not knowing the host OS :-(
14:59:41 clarkb it isn't jsut a reliability problem some of our providers don't expose nested virt at all. So it is a two tier problem. In some places we cannot use kvm. And in others we may but with the risk of poor reliability
15:00:19 clarkb kashyap: on the x86_64-v2 thing (^ related because qemu) does qemu not provide a predefined compatible cpu?
15:00:36 kashyap clarkb: Hiya
15:00:52 clarkb seems like it should? I remember when we first set up nova live migration testing one of the things I tried was defining a custom cpu since we have heterogenous resources in the clouds we use (and have no way to request consistent cpus)
15:01:02 clarkb but that didn't work at all whcih is how we ened up using he qemu64 model
15:01:07 kashyap Yeah, I know :-(
15:01:39 clarkb I want to say at the time we identified bugs in nova and friends and they were getting fixed so it is possible this is no longer an issue today but I think that if centos is saying that you need this minimum cpu now it is reasonable for there to be that cpu predefined in qemu
15:01:46 kashyap clarkb: Sadly, QEMU does not provide a model that will work on (a) TCG, i.e. plain emulation, *and* KVM; and (b) that works on Intel and AMD
15:01:52 kashyap clarkb: But!
15:02:01 kashyap There is an option I just tested. And this works:
15:02:15 kashyap clarkb: Using "Nehalem" satisfies both the above conditions.
15:02:21 kashyap And it works on both Intel and AMD.
15:02:34 kashyap Nehalem is the oldest comatible model that works with the x86_64-v2
15:03:00 clarkb got it so there is a predefined model that addresses things. That is great news. I guess we should consider defaulting devstack to that then?
15:03:06 kashyap Yes! Indeed
15:03:17 clarkb I can try pushing a devstack change later today that does that

Earlier   Later