| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2023-01-11 | |||
| 12:17:15 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: shoudl we not fix that then instead of removing the check | |
| 12:17:31 | sean-k-mooney | we should be validating the modifed one no? | |
| 12:17:45 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: The problem here is entirely due the older API, hence the recommendetaion to remove that now-buggy check | |
| 12:18:08 | sean-k-mooney | that really feels like a regression/bug to remove it | |
| 12:18:30 | kashyap | Maybe they're carrying downstream Ubuntu-specific patch? | |
| 12:18:44 | sean-k-mooney | ya maybe im not sure | |
| 12:19:05 | sean-k-mooney | its confusing give i knwo libvirt uses bugzilla for trackign right | |
| 12:19:22 | sean-k-mooney | so this libvirt tracker is presumabel for the ubunu package | |
| 12:19:58 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Upstream libvirt uses gitlab now | |
| 12:20:24 | kashyap | (E.g. the "mpx" issue was discussed here, also filed by the Ubuntu person: https://gitlab.com/libvirt/libvirt/-/issues/304) | |
| 12:21:09 | kashyap | (Also notice that is a private libvirt branch that you linked to) | |
| 12:21:12 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: so looking at https://gitlab.com/libvirt/libvirt/-/issues/304#note_1065798706 | |
| 12:21:24 | sean-k-mooney | do we use check=full or generate that check string today | |
| 12:21:45 | sean-k-mooney | this is not related to the start up check | |
| 12:22:02 | sean-k-mooney | but i think we leave that to libvirt to set in most if not all cases | |
| 12:23:03 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Here was the rationale that libvirt rejected that adding extra named model. Which I fully agree with: | |
| 12:23:09 | kashyap | Adding a new CPU model is not that serious, but it's not good either as | |
| 12:23:09 | kashyap | [quote] | |
| 12:23:10 | kashyap | libvirt. Especially adding a new CPU model which does not exist in QEMU | |
| 12:23:10 | kashyap | it causes unnecessary compatibility issues with older versions of | |
| 12:23:11 | kashyap | something else when starting QEMU. | |
| 12:23:11 | kashyap | does not make any sense, as libvirt would need to translate it to | |
| 12:23:14 | kashyap | [/quote] | |
| 12:23:16 | kashyap | https://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2022-August/233717.html | |
| 12:24:01 | sean-k-mooney | ya that makes sense why they would not want to do that | |
| 12:24:23 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Also almost since 4 years ago, QEMU and libvirt have stopped adding explicit named models like that "-noTSXAndThat_AndThisFeature" | |
| 12:24:26 | kashyap | Right. | |
| 12:24:38 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: No, we don't use "check=full" | |
| 12:24:39 | sean-k-mooney | i think i would still prefer to move the cpu check to include the extra flags | |
| 12:24:50 | kashyap | (Answering the earlier question) | |
| 12:24:53 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: ya i didnt think we did but wantted to confirm | |
| 12:25:11 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: I'll let some actual tests with real CPU models be done by QE to see the existing patch's impact | |
| 12:25:16 | kashyap | That way we have clear evidence. | |
| 12:25:55 | sean-k-mooney | ok i need to go take my blood pressue medication and do a few bits. brb | |
| 12:26:08 | kashyap | Sure, take care! And thanks for the discussion | |
| 12:54:51 | zigo | one colleague of mine says it's because the image was deleted first. Is he right? | |
| 12:54:51 | zigo | https://paste.opendev.org/show/bRFOvaXxQxs5vVdwzVRV/ | |
| 12:54:51 | zigo | Last night, we had a case of crash of nova when deleting a VM: | |
| 12:55:20 | sean-k-mooney | no i dont think so | |
| 12:55:39 | sean-k-mooney | this is related to the nvram not the glance/vm disk image | |
| 12:55:43 | zigo | How come Nova can't "undefine domain with nvram" then? | |
| 12:56:39 | zigo | Was this fixed in a version higher than Victoria? | |
| 12:56:41 | sean-k-mooney | it might be related to https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1785123 | |
| 12:57:06 | zigo | Oh, thanks. | |
| 12:57:18 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: there have been some nvram/uefi issues fixed since then yes | |
| 12:57:52 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/nova+nvram | |
| 12:58:29 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/335512 that seams to be the most driectly related | |
| 12:59:29 | zigo | It's abandonned though ... :/ | |
| 12:59:35 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/guest.py#L298 | |
| 12:59:44 | sean-k-mooney | yes but the fix was condtionaly added on master | |
| 12:59:48 | sean-k-mooney | if uefi is supported | |
| 12:59:56 | sean-k-mooney | so we fixed it in a differnt patch | |
| 13:00:11 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/539d381434ccadcdc3f5d58c2705c35558a3a065 | |
| 13:00:33 | sean-k-mooney | hum apparently in ocata | |
| 13:00:51 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: what version of qemu are you using | |
| 13:00:55 | sean-k-mooney | sory libvirt | |
| 13:01:14 | zigo | 7.0.0 | |
| 13:01:19 | zigo | (the one from Bullseye) | |
| 13:02:28 | sean-k-mooney | i wonder what support_uefi is set too | |
| 13:02:52 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Support unshelve with PCI in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/854616 | |
| 13:04:32 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: so we do this https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/70fd0cfc8ee2b541ffc1f9feb129314965d1670c/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L1349-L1351 | |
| 13:05:54 | zigo | Victoria has the same code... | |
| 13:06:17 | zigo | So you see... instance.image_meta.properties.get | |
| 13:06:30 | zigo | Is this taken from the *image* ?!? | |
| 13:06:58 | zigo | Or is it a copy of the image meta? | |
| 13:07:23 | sean-k-mooney | a copy but i assume its uefi | |
| 13:09:39 | sean-k-mooney | you might be higing a kernel api change where some parmater changed for 1/0 to y/n | |
| 13:09:59 | sean-k-mooney | can you check the output of virsh domcapabilities | |
| 13:11:05 | zigo | https://paste.opendev.org/show/bEp66voE4chYd3lF3eme/ | |
| 13:11:10 | zigo | What am I looking for? | |
| 13:12:14 | zigo | The <os supported='yes'> bits? | |
| 13:12:22 | sean-k-mooney | <loader supported='yes'> | |
| 13:12:31 | sean-k-mooney | line 12 | |
| 13:12:51 | zigo | Is it supposed to be 0/1 instead ? | |
| 13:13:14 | sean-k-mooney | no i was thinkin of a change for secure boot | |
| 13:13:18 | sean-k-mooney | which is seperate | |
| 13:16:12 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/train: Adapt websocketproxy tests for SimpleHTTPServer fix https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866201 | |
| 13:18:09 | zigo | sean-k-mooney: That bit of code is supposed to remove the disk containing the NVRAM values, right? | |
| 13:18:54 | sean-k-mooney | its not really a disk its a file that is uesd to store the uefi firmware data | |
| 13:19:09 | zigo | Right, that's what I had in mind. | |
| 13:19:26 | sean-k-mooney | but yes its to tell libvirt that its oke to delete the domain | |
| 13:19:47 | sean-k-mooney | inclucding undefining the nvram | |
| 13:38:59 | zigo | According to this patch's patch header https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/621646/ the UEFI NVRAM variable store isn't preserved on stop/start, hard reboot, cold migration, resize and live migration... | |
| 13:39:07 | zigo | Is it still the case? | |
| 13:41:17 | sean-k-mooney | that i am not sure about. i know that was a proablem in the past | |
| 13:42:17 | sean-k-mooney | i think this bug is still a thing | |
| 13:42:54 | sean-k-mooney | honestly i proably should escalte this internally too becasue this keeps getting stalled out | |
| 13:43:04 | sean-k-mooney | the people that started fixing it have moved on form openstack | |
| 14:38:03 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Add mock to avoid loading guestfs in unit test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/862769 | |
| 14:47:09 | 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 | |
| 15:14:35 | dansmith | 2023-01-11 07:00:50,878 WARNING [oslo_messaging.rpc.client] Using RPCClient manually to instantiate client. Please use get_rpc_client to obtain an RPC client instance. | |
| 15:14:47 | dansmith | thousands of those in each run now.. I guess something in o.msg changed | |
| 15:24:00 | gibi | dansmith: I think https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/869340 pulled in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/862419 that has the new warning | |
| 15:25:35 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Allow local scaphandre directory to be mapped to an instance using virtiofs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/861881 | |
| 15:31:15 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Allow local scaphandre directory to be mapped to an instance using virtiofs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/861881 | |
| 15:47:49 | gmann | dansmith: replied and updated the rbac default switch change, please check when you have time https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866218 | |
| 15:48:48 | gmann | I have pushed devstack changes (depends-on) to keep running all existing jobs on old default and new jobs run with new defaults. After we do 2023.1 release we can switch it to run all existing jobs to new defaults and one job to run on old defaults | |
| 15:50:39 | dansmith | cool | |
| 17:58:35 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/placement master: support multiple config files with apache https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/869863 | |
| 17:58:59 | sean-k-mooney | ^ is the placement version fo https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867162 | |