Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2022-02-09
16:06:24 sean-k-mooney yep
16:06:42 sean-k-mooney gibi: correct
16:06:49 gibi sean-k-mooney: cool
16:06:59 gibi then I pull the trigger on the series up until the doc
16:06:59 sean-k-mooney until the neutron change land there api validation will reject the vnic type
16:07:11 sean-k-mooney ack works for me
16:07:34 sean-k-mooney ok going to join donstream meeting
16:40:30 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add logic to enforce local api and db limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/712139
16:40:31 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Update quota_class APIs for db and api limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/712143
16:40:31 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Enforce api and db limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/712142
16:40:32 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Update quota sets APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/712749
16:40:32 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Update limit APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/712707
16:40:33 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Enforce resource limits using oslo.limit https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/615180
16:40:33 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Tell oslo.limit how to count nova resources https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/713301
16:40:34 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Update quota apis with keystone limits and usage https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/713499
16:40:34 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add legacy limits and usage to placement unified limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/713498
16:40:36 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Enable unified limits in the nova-next job https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/789963
16:40:36 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add reno for unified limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/715271
16:54:15 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/osc-placement master: Support microversion 1.39 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/osc-placement/+/828545
17:10:18 gmann gibi: replied - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/826491/7/placement/util.py#426
17:10:32 gmann it is same API behavior change that you also mentioned. !!!FOO is accepted as valid trait in code and there was no error at the down layer too so it is bad interface but success case for user. Now we are changing it to failure so break user. we should do this change in microversion only. any reason not to do as part of 1.39 ?
17:10:55 gmann we have lot of such cases in APIs in past and currently too
17:11:29 gmann main purpose of microversion was to improve the interface "not to be used incorrectly" without breaking the success case.
17:11:42 gmann * one of the purpose
17:33:23 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/placement master: Make perfload jobs fail if write allocation fails https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/828438
17:39:20 bauzas gmann: about the gate failure you mentioned yesterday at the nova meeting, do we have an open bug report against it ?
17:39:33 bauzas context :
17:39:35 bauzas https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2022/nova.2022-02-08-16.00.log.html#l-112
17:44:52 gmann bauzas: yes, this one https://bugs.launchpad.net/devstack/+bug/1960346
17:46:42 bauzas gmann: thanks
18:00:07 opendevreview sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: docs: Document virtio-net multiqueue https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/792362
18:09:59 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: doc: Remove useless contributor/api-2 doc https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/828599
18:09:59 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: doc: Split up notifications document https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/828598
18:13:37 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: doc: Correct version for virtio-net multiqueue https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/828601
18:13:39 stephenfin sean-k-mooney: Want to +2+W that ^
18:13:49 stephenfin Rather than respin the base patch
18:14:09 stephenfin I'd do it myself but good to sanity check
18:15:49 sean-k-mooney sure i can take a look
18:15:56 sean-k-mooney so you restacked teh chain
18:16:12 sean-k-mooney did you read my comment as to why this was needed
18:16:44 sean-k-mooney discussing it with fungi and other one suggestion was to modify zuul or to comment when submit failes in this case
18:17:04 sean-k-mooney basically "this patch is in merge confclit please rebase"
18:18:45 fungi it's not technically in "merge conflict" so much as that it has an outdated parent change, and so gerrit will refuse to create a merge commit for it when asked
18:19:16 sean-k-mooney fungi: ya you are right the imporant bit though is "you need to do something" before this can merge
18:19:19 fungi its parent got a new revision and then was merged, but this change did not get rebased when its parent was updated
18:19:28 fungi so that's what needs to be done, yeah
18:20:19 sean-k-mooney fungi: is that technially a job failure fomment or an actul zuul change. e.g. is the submit implemented as a job or part of zuul when using the gerrit driver
18:21:19 sean-k-mooney basically im wondering is this a chagne to the project-config repo for the job/pipline definition or a change in zuul
18:21:19 fungi zuul would need to get a new feature in its gerrit source connection driver to report that error to the change
18:21:29 sean-k-mooney ack
18:21:34 fungi you can actually see it indicated in the gerrit webui if you're not colorblind (no joke), the way they decide to show it is by making the "(merged)" next to the parent change red instead of grey
18:21:44 fungi they couldn't make that more subtle if they tried
18:22:23 sean-k-mooney is it?
18:22:49 sean-k-mooney i dont see that on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/792362/8
18:23:41 sean-k-mooney we might not be able to see this now since i have rebased
18:23:56 sean-k-mooney also im using dark mode so that might also be a thing
18:24:09 sean-k-mooney was that in the relation changed section
18:25:16 sean-k-mooney fungi: oh ok so its grey for me normally and its orange for me in this case
18:25:24 sean-k-mooney ya that is really not clear
18:25:52 sean-k-mooney like if i hover over it the alt text is just relation chain
18:25:56 fungi indeed. you have to be looking for it, and able to see that orange/red color distinct from grey
18:26:09 fungi and know what it means
18:26:20 sean-k-mooney right the last bit is the gap
18:26:33 sean-k-mooney ther is nothing in the ui that tells you what that means
18:26:42 sean-k-mooney ux bug i guess
18:26:53 fungi though if you click the parent change in the relation list, then you'll be taken to the outdated patchset which you can see in its patchset drop-down once there
18:27:05 sean-k-mooney right
18:27:22 sean-k-mooney but since zuul does not enforece the same restrcions
18:27:27 sean-k-mooney and the test pass
18:27:34 sean-k-mooney there is a disconenct
18:31:09 sean-k-mooney stephenfin: i proably dont have the brain capasity today to review https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:notifications-docs properly so ill leave the tab open and try to review them tomorrow
18:31:35 stephenfin sean-k-mooney: oh yeah, I just meant https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/828601
18:31:43 stephenfin the others can wait, for sure :)
18:32:06 sean-k-mooney by the way im off friday and monday so if i dont get to it tomrrow ping me on tuesday and ill review them then
18:35:20 chateaulav sean-k-mooney: I seperated the patch into 3. As clarification on submitting them for review, do i follow this process? https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/developers.html#adding-a-dependency
18:36:39 sean-k-mooney you can normally i just do "git review -t <gerrit topic>" from the top patch
18:36:51 sean-k-mooney so if you have the 3 commits locally
18:36:59 sean-k-mooney i rebase againt master
18:37:18 sean-k-mooney then git review -t <bp/<blueprint name>
18:37:37 sean-k-mooney that will submit all patches not on the target branch and update the relevent reviews
18:38:10 sean-k-mooney you only need to do git review -d $PARENT_CHANGE_NUMBER and git review -x $CHILD_CHANGE_NUMBER
18:38:31 sean-k-mooney if you are changing the base and dont want to do an rebase
18:38:40 sean-k-mooney or interactive rebase
18:38:53 sean-k-mooney chateaulav: does that make sense
18:39:50 sean-k-mooney chateaulav: i assume the dep you need is the os-traits bump
18:40:03 chateaulav https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/S4uju6sp/
18:40:37 chateaulav sean-k-mooney: the os-trait one i got. it is for the 3 patchsets within nova
18:41:10 sean-k-mooney ya so the simplet thing to do in your case is do git-reveiew -d <os-traits patch>
18:41:29 sean-k-mooney then git review -x your thee pathces
18:41:52 sean-k-mooney then do git review -t <topic>
18:42:03 sean-k-mooney but before you do that give me one sec
18:42:50 sean-k-mooney https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/826675
18:43:00 sean-k-mooney the os-traits patch has not merged yet and is in the ci
18:43:12 sean-k-mooney so whwen you do the git-review you need to ensure you do not rebase that
18:43:20 sean-k-mooney or it will restat the ci jobs
18:43:31 sean-k-mooney so either wait for that to merge which should happen this evening
18:43:48 sean-k-mooney or when you do the finall git review pass -R i belive to prevent git review form rebasing
18:43:48 chateaulav k
18:44:12 chateaulav that makes more sense, appreciate it.
18:44:47 sean-k-mooney ya so checking man git-review

Earlier   Later