| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-08-16 | |||
| 20:46:57 | sean-k-mooney | its not recheck the clears it | |
| 20:47:01 | sean-k-mooney | its zuul | |
| 20:47:09 | sean-k-mooney | it only does it when the build set starts | |
| 20:47:28 | sean-k-mooney | or ends i cant rememebr | |
| 20:47:47 | sean-k-mooney | but it will clear the result when the job end i think | |
| 20:48:14 | sean-k-mooney | its a little od because i know the gate pipeline clear it at the start of the jobs | |
| 20:51:11 | JayF | interesting, I'll file that knowledge away | |
| 20:51:31 | sean-k-mooney | i think this is defiend by the pipeline config | |
| 20:52:17 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/project-config/blob/master/zuul.d/pipelines.yaml#L90-L92 | |
| 20:52:54 | sean-k-mooney | JayF: if you look at the check pipline above it it does not have the start action for the gerrit trigger defiend | |
| 20:53:05 | sean-k-mooney | so verifed is only update on success or failure | |
| 20:53:19 | JayF | that makes sense | |
| 20:56:12 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: add sorce dev parsing for vdpa interfaces https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841016 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2022-08-17 | |||
| 00:34:49 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Adapt websocketproxy tests for SimpleHTTPServer fix https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/853379 | |
| 07:06:53 | gibi | melwitt: thank you for taking the triage baton | |
| 07:14:38 | whoami-rajat | hey bauzas , jfyi I've rebased my rebuild feature to use mv 2.94 | |
| 10:06:53 | gibi | melwitt, sean-k-mooney, stephenfin: with frickler's help the https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/826523 is unblocked now (the procedural -2 is removed). I let some of you +A the bottom when you feel it can start landing | |
| 10:08:17 | sean-k-mooney | ah sorry had to load context frickler removed sylvains procedual -2 | |
| 10:08:20 | sean-k-mooney | got it | |
| 10:09:40 | sean-k-mooney | looks like the first third to half of the feature is ready to merge so ill kick off the start of the serries thanks for that | |
| 10:11:31 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: done | |
| 10:11:45 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: cool | |
| 10:12:37 | sean-k-mooney | that should merge everything up until https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/760456/12 | |
| 10:14:07 | sean-k-mooney | ah i was +1 on that while we were debating the terminology | |
| 10:19:02 | sean-k-mooney | ok upgraded my votes on 2 other so that should bring us up to https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/826529/9 and later which i have not really reviewd. thats just over half way i think so that will help manage the patch seires review | |
| 10:19:57 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: im not sure ill have time today but am i right in assuming there are some patches ready to review in the pci series | |
| 10:20:26 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: yes, until https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/850468 it is ready | |
| 10:21:08 | gibi | patches top of that is under development (have TODOs in the commit message) | |
| 10:21:26 | sean-k-mooney | ok cool ill see if i can make some time for those | |
| 10:30:10 | gibi | thanks | |
| 10:31:41 | sean-k-mooney | do you have the link to the etherpad for the feature reviews by the way | |
| 10:32:59 | sean-k-mooney | i have the microversion plan https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-zed-microversions-plan but cant recall what the other one was called | |
| 10:34:15 | sean-k-mooney | oh its proably on the meeting wiki | |
| 10:34:34 | sean-k-mooney | ah yes https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-zed-blueprint-status | |
| 10:43:54 | gibi | sorry I was distracted | |
| 10:44:02 | gibi | but yes you found the right one | |
| 11:14:07 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Add limitation to docs about bug 1983570 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/852168 | |
| 11:18:48 | sean-k-mooney | artom: o/ | |
| 11:19:15 | artom | ~o~ | |
| 11:19:55 | sean-k-mooney | artom: will you have time to work on updating bauzas's mdev parseing seriese this week | |
| 11:20:59 | artom | sean-k-mooney, yeah, I didn't forget | |
| 11:21:21 | sean-k-mooney | thanks | |
| 13:06:39 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/train: [CI] Fix gate by using zuulv3 live migration and grenade jobs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/795435 | |
| 14:17:17 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/xena: Reproducer unit test for bug 1934094 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/842922 | |
| 15:14:49 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/xena: Fix instance's image_ref lost on failed unshelving https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/842923 | |
| 15:27:53 | melwitt | gibi: \o/ thanks! | |
| 15:29:28 | gibi | melwitt: :) | |
| 15:34:57 | melwitt | elodilles: thank you for getting stable/train unblocked. it's a miracle! 😂 | |
| 15:54:19 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Reproduce bug 1986838 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/853516 | |
| 15:54:39 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: ^^ another interesting bug fall out from the pci work | |
| 15:56:44 | gibi | the scheduler expects the compute will fail and the compute says the scheduler should have done a better job | |
| 15:57:06 | gibi | but eventually nobody does its job and we have broken instances | |
| 15:57:08 | gibi | story of nova :D | |
| 16:08:49 | elodilles | melwitt: np, it was your patch anyway o:) so thanks too! :) | |
| 16:09:55 | elodilles | i still don't know what is causing the original problem, but at least with zuul v3 jobs the gate works \o/ | |
| 16:16:36 | melwitt | same. glad you thought to try that patch again, I don't think I would have thought of it :) | |
| 16:19:34 | elodilles | well, it was not even my idea as neutron team fixed the same issue with the same solution: changing to zuul v3, so that is why i also tried it o:) | |
| 16:24:21 | melwitt | :D | |
| 16:53:25 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: i tought we had a check to prevent two alisis beign the same | |
| 16:54:08 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: we dont have. And with the traits in alias we can create different aliases that matches the same device from nova perspective | |
| 16:54:49 | gibi | but at least with placement we in the above case there would be zero allocation candidates | |
| 16:54:58 | gibi | so the scheduling would fail accordingly | |
| 16:55:06 | gibi | anyhow I will propose a simple fix that is backportable | |
| 16:55:22 | gibi | and on master this could never happen with placement | |
| 16:55:29 | gibi | after the pci in placement lands | |
| 16:55:52 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/unit/pci/test_request.py#L190-L231 | |
| 16:56:01 | sean-k-mooney | this is what i was remembering | |
| 16:56:29 | sean-k-mooney | we prevent the same alis beign defiend twice with confliging numa_policies or device types | |
| 16:57:04 | gibi | yeah we prevent defining the same alias twice | |
| 16:57:10 | gibi | but we allow two aliases matching the same device | |
| 16:57:18 | sean-k-mooney | yep the second is valid | |
| 16:57:27 | sean-k-mooney | what is not valid is having 2 claims agaisnt one device | |
| 16:57:50 | sean-k-mooney | the two alisas shoudl have created two pci request objects | |
| 16:58:12 | sean-k-mooney | the bug is that we dont ensure the all pci_request objects are fullfiled by unique host pci adresses | |
| 16:59:18 | gibi | there will be two InstancePCIRequest objects that is OK. the bug is either a) the scheduler does not fail when it fails to consume both requests b) pci_claim does not fail when fails to consume both requests | |
| 16:59:26 | sean-k-mooney | for example if the alias name is differnt its fine for the addres/(product_id/vendor_id) to be the same with different numa polcies | |
| 16:59:48 | sean-k-mooney | ya so its A | |
| 17:00:06 | sean-k-mooney | we should not get to the claim on the compute host if there is only one device | |
| 17:00:28 | sean-k-mooney | by the way the code for the schdluler and the comptue node is basically the same | |
| 17:00:38 | sean-k-mooney | excpt the schduler path uses a copy of the data | |
| 17:00:56 | sean-k-mooney | when its checking if you can consume the pci device | |
| 17:01:10 | sean-k-mooney | so if you fix it it will fix it for both | |
| 17:01:12 | gibi | but even if #a) passes as there is two free devices at that time. #b) shouldt detect and fail if a parallel claim request consumed one of the devices and the new request cannot be fulfilled | |
| 17:01:25 | sean-k-mooney | yes | |
| 17:01:38 | sean-k-mooney | but a is impletnend by calling the code for b on a copy of the data | |
| 17:01:47 | sean-k-mooney | so we fix the later it fixes both | |
| 17:02:27 | gibi | while in general the logic of the scheduler and the pci claim is the same for pci, in reality this part differs. I will push the fix and show that we need to fix this in two separate places | |
| 17:04:28 | gibi | I think we are the same as using _filter_pools but then that is called from two differnt paths by the two service | |
| 17:04:33 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/pci/stats.py#L622-L647 | |
| 17:04:44 | sean-k-mooney | support_resuts just calls filter_pools | |
| 17:04:58 | sean-k-mooney | correct | |
| 17:05:06 | sean-k-mooney | on the compute node it calls consume_requests | |
| 17:05:20 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/pci/stats.py#L226-L269 | |
| 17:05:21 | gibi | btw, https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/pci/stats.py#L645 is broken as it individually matches requests to pools and does not consume pools by requests | |
| 17:05:47 | sean-k-mooney | but fixing it in _filter_pools is what i ment by fixing it in one place to fix both | |
| 17:05:48 | gibi | the scheduler calls apply_requests that detects the double consumption | |
| 17:06:14 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: fixing it in filter_pools is tricky as filter_pools does not meant to consume things | |
| 17:06:26 | gibi | can be done though if needed | |
| 17:06:33 | sean-k-mooney | right but apply is not ment to be called in the sculer | |
| 17:06:43 | sean-k-mooney | it will work but we need to make sure not to commit to it on the db | |