| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-12-15 | |||
| 18:23:58 | sean-k-mooney | ack ill be around tomorrow as well but after that ill be back in the new year | |
| 18:24:15 | sean-k-mooney | feel free to add me to them or ping me and ill happliy review the backports | |
| 18:24:44 | rloo | Thanks sean-k-mooney!! | |
| 20:14:39 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Ironic: retry when node not available https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/842478 | |
| 21:16:23 | opendevreview | Ruby Loo proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: Ironic nodes with instance reserved in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867912 | |
| 22:41:03 | opendevreview | Ruby Loo proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: Ironic nodes with instance reserved in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867912 | |
| 23:11:27 | opendevreview | Ruby Loo proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: Ironic nodes with instance reserved in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867912 | |
| 23:14:13 | opendevreview | Ruby Loo proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: Ironic nodes with instance reserved in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867338 | |
| 23:23:26 | opendevreview | Ruby Loo proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: Ironic nodes with instance reserved in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867913 | |
| 23:24:16 | opendevreview | Ruby Loo proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Ironic nodes with instance reserved in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867914 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2022-12-16 | |||
| 05:04:49 | thuvh | IDENTIFY | |
| 08:08:17 | congnt | Hi everyone, I have a new compute with CPU (Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 5320 CPU @ 2.20GHz) Icelake Intel. But libvirt recognize model is Broadwell-noTSX-IBRS. Anyone know this bug? I'm use OpenStack Victoria deploy by kolla-ansible, libvirt version 6.0.0-0ubuntu8.8 | |
| 08:15:25 | obre | congnt: Hi! I guess that a "cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep mpx" returnes no results? | |
| 08:15:44 | congnt | Yes | |
| 08:16:07 | congnt | No result with this command | |
| 08:17:08 | obre | The issue is basicly that libvirt expects that flag to call a CPU "IceLake". | |
| 08:17:33 | obre | But Intel does not ship mpx-support for quite a few of their newer CPU-lines. | |
| 08:17:51 | obre | But you can configure libvirt with your own custom cpu-models. | |
| 08:18:21 | obre | We do for example use this file on our IceLake nodes: https://github.com/ntnusky/profile/blob/master/files/libvirt/cpu/x86_Icelake-Server-NTNU.xml | |
| 08:19:40 | obre | Add that file to /usr/share/libvirt/cpu_map/ and update /usr/share/libvirt/cpu_map/index.xml to include a link to it. Then after a restart of libvirt you should have an ICE-Lake CPU available. | |
| 08:32:25 | congnt | obre: thank you so much, i will research it. | |
| 10:52:59 | sean-k-mooney | congnt: ya so this is a common issue with older release of libvirt. | |
| 10:54:32 | sean-k-mooney | congnt: there are 3 ways to work around it if you cant us a newer libvirt, 1 is create a custom model, possibly by copying the one form a newer release, the next is to use the model that matches closed by setting cpu_mode=custom and cpu_model=<whatever> the final way to work around this is set cpu_mode=host-passthrough | |
| 10:55:24 | sean-k-mooney | for 2 i forgot to say you can add the missing cpu flage with cpu_model_extra_flags | |
| 10:55:35 | sean-k-mooney | those config options are all in the libvirt section fo the nova.conf | |
| 11:09:39 | songwenping | sean-k-mooney: hi, i remember the live migration will check source node's resource capacity right? | |
| 11:20:09 | songwenping | sean-k-mooney: hi, i remember the live migration will also check source node's memory capacity right? | |
| 11:27:22 | sean-k-mooney | i would have to check if live migration is using 2 seperate allcotions or just one. i know for some move operations we use the migration context to hold the allcoation for one of the nodes and the vm for the other | |
| 11:28:28 | sean-k-mooney | we have not ported all move operations to use that workflows. cold migration does if i recall correctly, evacuate does not i think live migration will use 2 allocations but again i would need to look at the code to confirm | |
| 11:32:46 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: bauzas do ye recall off the top of ye're heads what we do for live migration ^ | |
| 11:56:48 | gibi | live migration uses the migration uuid to hold the source node alloc | |
| 11:56:59 | gibi | only evacuate is an exception | |
| 11:59:06 | sean-k-mooney | ack that is what i tought | |
| 11:59:43 | sean-k-mooney | we should fix evacuation sooner rather then later... im going to go add that to our downstream backlog | |
| 12:00:33 | sean-k-mooney | maybe i can push for that in B or C it would be nice to get that finally fixed | |
| 12:00:49 | sean-k-mooney | although the placement allocation explostion issue might be more imporant | |
| 12:01:17 | sean-k-mooney | we also still need to start using the consumer types feature right | |
| 12:01:32 | sean-k-mooney | to actully start marging the migration allcoations as migrations | |
| 12:02:02 | gibi | yes and yes | |
| 12:03:26 | sean-k-mooney | by the way i will shortly be resuming the pci series review stephenfin are you on pto from today? | |
| 12:04:14 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: im hoping to finish reviewign the rest of the pci seriese today but if not it will be my goal to get it completed the first week of january when im back | |
| 12:42:49 | songwenping | sean-k-mooney,gibi: it seems not reasonable if live migration uses 2 seperate allocations, the vm cannot be migrate if the source node have not enough resouce. | |
| 12:50:46 | sean-k-mooney | songwenping: it can we wont stop the migration if the source is over commited | |
| 12:51:20 | sean-k-mooney | that will fail for evacuate but live migration shoudl work | |
| 12:51:47 | sean-k-mooney | that said you shoudl never get into that situration unless you change something in a way that was unsupproted or hit a bug | |
| 12:52:13 | sean-k-mooney | for example reduced the memory in the source node either intentiollay or due to a dim failure or change the allcoation ratio | |
| 12:52:50 | songwenping | we use the Rocky code, and placement is integrated with nova. | |
| 12:53:17 | sean-k-mooney | multiple allocation was intoduced in Queens | |
| 12:53:23 | sean-k-mooney | so it shoudl be there in rocky | |
| 12:54:16 | songwenping | but we encounter the problem, the vm cannot migrate because the source node's memory over commit | |
| 12:55:12 | sean-k-mooney | we may have a bug in rocky or master then but you shoudl not be in an over commit senario | |
| 12:55:36 | sean-k-mooney | its fine to oversubscibe provided the total amoutn adn allocation ratio align | |
| 12:55:56 | sean-k-mooney | the temporay fix woudl be to increase the allocation ratio to enabel the migration | |
| 12:56:03 | sean-k-mooney | and then restore it when done | |
| 12:56:16 | sean-k-mooney | althernitivly you coudl try cold migration. | |
| 12:58:40 | songwenping | yes, we try to increase the allocation ratio now, and analyse why the memory is over commit | |
| 13:12:26 | gibi | yepp it is a know behavior that you cannot migrate from an overallocated node. remove the overallocation by temporarily increasing allocation ratio, move the instance, restore the allocation ratio. And separately investigate how you ended up in an overallocated scenario | |
| 13:18:45 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: i tought that only affected migrtions that uses a single allcoation | |
| 13:20:25 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I think it is the other way around. Evacuation is the only move that does not use migration allocation on the source. It only extend the instance allocation to cover both the source and the dest node. So I think evac is not effect by this | |
| 13:20:49 | gibi | all the other move operators move the instance allocation from the instance_uuid to the migration_uuid on the source node | |
| 13:21:01 | gibi | that move allocation is what triggers the situation | |
| 13:21:10 | gibi | becuase placement does not have a move semantic | |
| 13:22:38 | sean-k-mooney | hum maybe | |
| 13:23:03 | gibi | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/36091a7ed7ad553d5cbb5dcfde0090e1e762bc34/nova/scheduler/client/report.py#L2023-L2043 | |
| 13:23:04 | sean-k-mooney | evacuate is broken for overcommited case too however | |
| 13:23:23 | sean-k-mooney | the extention failes if the souce is over allcoated | |
| 13:23:58 | gibi | OK then I was mistaken on that part. then all allocation manipulation is reject by placement if there is at least one overallocated RP in the change | |
| 13:24:20 | sean-k-mooney | proably yes | |
| 13:24:47 | gibi | for some reason I assumed that if the allocation on the overallocated RP does not change then it is OK and evac only adds new alloc on new RPs. | |
| 13:24:51 | sean-k-mooney | i filed a downstrema tracker for this and its a know issue upstream so hopefully this will eventually get resovled | |
| 13:24:59 | sean-k-mooney | although it might require placemtn changes | |
| 13:25:46 | gibi | the resolution probably needs a new placement microversion either to change the semantic of the existing POST /allocations or to add a new API that understands move semantic | |
| 13:26:06 | gibi | but I agree to do something as it is a common issue from deployers | |
| 13:40:45 | opendevreview | Jorge San Emeterio proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Review usage of oslo-privsep library on Nova https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/865432 | |
| 13:49:24 | opendevreview | Ruby Loo proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: Ironic nodes with instance reserved in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867912 | |
| 14:03:34 | opendevreview | Ruby Loo proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: Ironic nodes with instance reserved in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867913 | |
| 14:07:59 | opendevreview | Ruby Loo proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Ironic nodes with instance reserved in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867914 | |
| 14:08:20 | gibi | bauzas, sean-k-mooney: fyi I filed two bugs in the last two days about gate instabilties as I'm hitting them https://bugs.launchpad.net/glance/+bug/1999800 https://bugs.launchpad.net/tempest/+bug/1999893 | |
| 14:09:03 | bauzas | shitty shit | |
| 14:09:37 | bauzas | gibi: thanks | |
| 14:09:59 | gibi | these are infrequent ones but I see both more than once so I reported them | |
| 14:52:05 | gibi | I'm a magnet of bugs these days | |
| 14:52:11 | gibi | the latest, this is from my local env | |
| 14:52:12 | gibi | Dec 16 15:51:21 bedrock kernel: traps: flake8[1268565] general protection fault ip:55f5a5ed6e83 sp:7ffdf4a39d50 error:0 in python3.10[55f5a5dba000+2a3000] | |
| 14:52:35 | gibi | I cannot even run tox -e pep8 as flake8 fails all the time | |
| 14:54:33 | ykarel | Hi can someone look into https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1949606 | |
| 14:55:02 | ykarel | libvirt-8.0.0 now provides option to set tb-cache | |
| 14:56:03 | ykarel | without it it's difficult to run multiple guests vm together in CI on jammy hosts | |
| 15:07:27 | gibi | ykarel: can we default tb-cache size globally via some libvir configuration? | |
| 15:07:30 | gibi | kashyap: ^^ | |
| 15:08:17 | ykarel | gibi, no idea, but if that's possible then would be helpful as can be set outside of nova too | |
| 15:08:52 | gibi | ykarel: yep, it would be convinient otherwise we need to create a nova feature just for our CI usage | |
| 15:09:13 | ykarel | yes | |
| 15:09:48 | gibi | i.e. a new nova compute host level config variable in [libvirt] section set to some small value applied blindly to all emulated domains by the nova-compute service | |
| 15:10:30 | ykarel | it used to be 32MiB before it was raised to 1GiB | |
| 15:10:46 | ykarel | so that should be good for CI atleast | |
| 15:13:51 | kashyap | gibi: Hmmm, good question | |
| 15:14:12 | kashyap | gibi: It rings a faint bell as I looked at it in the past, but I forget | |
| 15:14:36 | kashyap | I'm in a hurry as I need to take a train shortly, but I'll take a quick look | |
| 15:14:49 | gibi | kashyap: no worries, it is not super urgent :) | |