| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-12-06 | |||
| 16:28:43 | opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Dec 6 16:28:43 2022 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | |
| 16:29:23 | elodilles | thanks bauzas o/ | |
| 16:29:51 | elodilles | that sounds fun :D | |
| 16:29:51 | sean-k-mooney | kgube: we generally do not like tracking changes to nova in other projects specs | |
| 16:30:31 | sean-k-mooney | kgube: if you are chaing the sematics or the extend voluem external event even if that does not change the content passed to the api we shoudl still have a spec to dicuss that | |
| 16:30:47 | kgube | sean-k-mooney, alright! | |
| 16:30:57 | sean-k-mooney | Kirill_: i wanted gmann or other to confirm my reasoning on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/863773/10/specs/wallaby/approved/nova-vnc-support-for-ironic.rst#134 | |
| 16:32:03 | sean-k-mooney | Kirill_: i.e. that we do not need a microversion for this change and there is no other upgrade impact for the reasons is stated in the commnet | |
| 16:35:11 | gmann | sean-k-mooney: I kept it open but somehow got distracted. It is in my list. | |
| 16:35:57 | Kirill_ | per my understanding, we don't need any miniversions cause if nova does not support my changes the result will be the same as now, if ironic does not support - again we will catch error - vnc is unsupported. i'll try such scenarios tomorrow. | |
| 16:36:54 | sean-k-mooney | Kirill_: ya so part of what im wondering is changing form a 400 to a 200 ok | |
| 16:37:15 | sean-k-mooney | and i think it is because if it was a libvirt instance then a 200 would have been valid | |
| 16:37:31 | sean-k-mooney | or possible for the same api request | |
| 16:37:46 | sean-k-mooney | so to me there is no need for a microverion | |
| 16:38:55 | Kirill_ | ++ | |
| 20:22:51 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Test aborting queued live migration https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841483 | |
| 20:22:57 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Add functional tests to reproduce bug #1960412 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841760 | |
| 20:48:58 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Clean up when queued live migration aborted https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841736 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2022-12-07 | |||
| 01:09:58 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/train: Fix the wrong exception used to retry detach API calls https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866090 | |
| 01:09:59 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/train: Retry attachment delete API call for 504 Gateway Timeout https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866091 | |
| 04:57:37 | opendevreview | Hiroki Narukawa proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: add sftp driver https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866672 | |
| 07:24:12 | opendevreview | Hiroki Narukawa proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: add sftp driver https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866672 | |
| 10:24:06 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Support multiple config file with mod_wsgi https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864014 | |
| 10:24:39 | gibi | bauzas: ^^ that is an easy fix | |
| 10:24:58 | bauzas | gibi: ack, looking | |
| 10:26:03 | gibi | stephenfin: a friendly poke about the pci in placement series. If you have time, review would be appreciated. bottom is: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/852771 | |
| 10:50:11 | sahid_ | gibi: o/ i will review it as well if you don't mind :-) | |
| 10:51:05 | gibi | sahid_: go for it! and thank you :) | |
| 10:51:33 | gibi | sahid_: please note that we landed the inventory reporting and allocation healing in zed, the patches open now is for the scheduling support | |
| 10:51:56 | gibi | sahid_: and also this is only covering PCI devices requested via the pci alias in the flavor. The neutron SRIOV support is planned for later | |
| 10:56:34 | sahid_ | ack thank you for the heads-up I noticed that on the first path some of them get landed during zed | |
| 11:33:14 | sean-k-mooney | sahid_: the feature has basiclaly been code compelte for a while it just hit m3 so got pushed to A | |
| 11:34:21 | sean-k-mooney | sahid_: our orginal goal was to try and land this all by m1 but time going away form us so we are trying to make an effort to finaly get this merged before people start disaparing for PTO | |
| 11:36:42 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Support multiple config file with mod_wsgi https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864014 | |
| 11:49:13 | sahid_ | sean-k-mooney: ack i understand your point i guess | |
| 11:56:44 | sahid_ | guys I have a question regarding the usage of NOTE(name) do we really think that we should continue using it? I mean most of the time such note a just comment, no actions are required. Where I see that makes sense is for TODO/FIXME | |
| 11:58:58 | sean-k-mooney | yes i dislike having bare NOTE/FIXME without the name | |
| 11:59:17 | sean-k-mooney | it has come up before that we coudl drop the (name) portion | |
| 11:59:21 | sean-k-mooney | and some project have | |
| 11:59:38 | sean-k-mooney | we have a hacking check that enforces it to keep nova consitent | |
| 11:59:42 | sahid_ | I would drop the whole NOTE thingm with name or not | |
| 12:00:04 | sean-k-mooney | and just use bare comments | |
| 12:00:09 | sahid_ | yes | |
| 12:00:34 | sean-k-mooney | we could but because we cant eaially use git blame on some of our files | |
| 12:00:47 | sahid_ | instead of for TODO(name) or FIXME(name), which make sense has there is an action behind it | |
| 12:00:50 | sean-k-mooney | i kind of like having the name so i know who to ask about the note | |
| 12:01:10 | sean-k-mooney | sahid_: well the name is not ment to represent who is going to work on it | |
| 12:01:18 | sean-k-mooney | for TODO() and FIXME() | |
| 12:01:18 | sahid_ | yes i would have use git blame, but if we can't I understand | |
| 12:01:39 | sean-k-mooney | so the libvirt driver and compute manager often time out on github | |
| 12:02:06 | sean-k-mooney | so while i coudl do blame locally it does not work well for github/gitia | |
| 12:06:45 | sahid_ | BTW gibi, very impressive work | |
| 12:09:05 | gibi | sahid_: thanks, it was fun to get through it. I learned many things about our PCI codepath during that | |
| 12:09:32 | sahid_ | I imagine :-) | |
| 12:13:57 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: im sure you now have the scares on your soul to prove it too :P | |
| 12:14:17 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: with that said its both better and worse then it appears at first glance | |
| 12:14:48 | sean-k-mooney | once you wrap your head aroudn teh design its elegant in a way in how the virt driver bits are entirly abstracted | |
| 12:15:10 | sean-k-mooney | but there is a lot of other questionable choices that you ahve rectifed along the way | |
| 13:22:06 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I agree with you I think the overal desing is OK, it just has a step learning curve | |
| 13:36:47 | sean-k-mooney | its proably comperable to emac/vims | |
| 13:36:56 | sean-k-mooney | which is not something to strive for | |
| 15:40:47 | sahid | o/ bauzas do you think we could discuss whehter the impl can get the Priority-Review bit as the spec received it? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/857838 | |
| 16:29:11 | opendevreview | Konrad Gube proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Use extend volume migration https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/855490 | |
| 16:30:09 | opendevreview | Konrad Gube proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Use extend volume completion action https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/855490 | |
| 16:47:09 | gibi | bauzas: zuul is happy now on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864014 | |
| 16:47:49 | bauzas | gibi: sent to the gate | |
| 16:47:54 | gibi | bauzas: thansk!~ | |
| 16:47:58 | gibi | thanks even :) | |
| 16:48:55 | kgube_ | sean-k-mooney, I rewrote the spec to reflect the current proposal in Cinder: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/855490 | |
| 17:00:35 | sean-k-mooney | thansk i should have time to review it tomorrow | |
| 17:26:21 | melwitt | bauzas: fyi auniyal has joined the bug triage rotation and put his name on the roster to help out | |
| 17:26:44 | bauzas | all cool | |
| 17:33:01 | gmann | bauzas: can you please check the 2023.1 testing runtime updates changes (few are trivial: update python classifier) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/861111 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/osc-placement/+/861470 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/861471 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-traits/+/861466 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/861469 | |
| 17:33:14 | gmann | and adding focal job in nova, the first link | |
| 17:43:30 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: nice find https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866090/1/nova/volume/cinder.py#578 | |
| 17:45:01 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: thanks for looking :) | |
| 17:45:06 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: for api calls in functinal test we should be intersepting the calls in the cinder fixutre | |
| 17:45:56 | sean-k-mooney | so yes the get shoudl either be mocked in the fixutre or via requests later | |
| 17:46:59 | sean-k-mooney | its currently calling https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866090/1/nova/volume/cinder.py#491 right | |
| 17:47:43 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: I'm actually not sure if mocking 'nova.volume.cinder.API.attachment_get' would avoid the problem ... currently I have mocked 'nova.volume.cinder.API.get' (higher level). I can try mocking at the lower level and see what happens | |
| 17:48:12 | melwitt | yes that's right | |
| 17:48:17 | sean-k-mooney | what i dont really understand is why is this failing on python 27 | |
| 17:48:25 | sean-k-mooney | but not py3 | |
| 17:48:40 | melwitt | me neither. I googled a lot too and didn't find anything useful. you might have better luck | |
| 17:48:42 | sean-k-mooney | did the signiture of somethign change | |
| 17:49:33 | melwitt | I didn't think so... but the place it's failing is in deepcopy when it tries to "reconstruct the object" which is something I don't completely understand | |
| 17:50:11 | sean-k-mooney | do you know where that deep copy happens | |
| 17:50:25 | sean-k-mooney | i assume one of the fixtures right | |
| 17:50:31 | melwitt | yes it's in _untranslate_volume_summary_view | |
| 17:50:48 | melwitt | in nova/volume/cinder.py | |
| 17:50:50 | melwitt | no | |
| 17:51:06 | sean-k-mooney | oh right | |
| 17:51:28 | sean-k-mooney | i see and calling deepcopy on MagicMock is causing issue | |
| 17:51:50 | melwitt | yeah. but there are other tests that have the same thing afaict and don't fail. I don't get it | |
| 17:52:02 | melwitt | *other tests in the same test file | |
| 17:52:37 | melwitt | it's just this one test | |
| 17:52:53 | sean-k-mooney | its this depcopy ? d['volume_image_metadata'] = copy.deepcopy(vol.volume_image_metadata) | |
| 17:53:02 | melwitt | yes | |
| 17:53:06 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/90c0c687a487601e009c72f60c88be92f6a55264/nova/volume/cinder.py#L319 | |
| 17:53:20 | melwitt | that's the one | |