Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2023-01-31
16:30:59 gmann here in nova, we can check if any of those maintainers are active (in OpenStack or in PyPi maintenance) and we need to talk to them first
16:31:00 bauzas novaos-vif has berrange and jaypipes as maintainers.os-resource-classes has cdent as maintainerplacement has cdent as maintainerosc-placement has malor as maintaineros-traits has o-tony as maintainer
16:31:10 dansmith bauzas: fine with me
16:31:38 gibi fine by me too
16:31:39 bauzas tbh I even don't know malor
16:31:47 bauzas which is a bit of a security risk
16:32:10 elodilles +1
16:32:18 gmann +1
16:32:29 sean-k-mooney i tought i got os-vif moved over to me at some point but sure
16:32:35 bauzas gmann: OK, I'll just leave a comment in the etherpad saying that the nova community agrees on removing those names
16:32:46 gmann bauzas: perfect. thanks
16:33:01 bauzas sean-k-mooney: tbh, I'm OK with leaving only openstackci as the sole maitainer
16:33:14 sean-k-mooney ya thats fine
16:33:19 bauzas from a security pov, I understand the concerns
16:34:00 bauzas and that reminds me the beam accelerator security issue
16:34:09 sean-k-mooney oh it was more we need to fix somehting but it was launchpad i got them to amend
16:35:00 bauzas can we then consider this done ?
16:35:56 sean-k-mooney i think so at least form our part
16:36:03 gmann yes, that is needed from project side. adding audit result in etherpad
16:36:04 sean-k-mooney the maintainer need to actuly be updated
16:36:26 bauzas I mean, are we done discussing this topic now ?
16:36:39 bauzas if so, nothing left on the agenda
16:37:14 bauzas except maybe documing the volume detach issues but since they are actually unrelated to our releases, I think I'll just drop this iteam
16:37:17 bauzas item
16:37:36 bauzas so
16:37:42 bauzas any other item to raise by now ?
16:38:31 Uggla Can you quickly discuss about :https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/868089/8
16:39:19 Uggla I would like to know if we would like to backport it and to which version.
16:41:34 bauzas isn't it changing the logic ?
16:41:37 gibi based on the impl it is backportable
16:41:52 bauzas wait
16:42:09 gibi it has a dependency on https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:bug%252F1628606 which is being backported
16:42:14 bauzas this is post_live_mig_at_dest()
16:42:27 bauzas which is run on the dest
16:42:54 bauzas my question is, in a rolling upgrade scenario with operators moving workloads from old compute to new compute
16:43:08 bauzas would that break them ?
16:43:27 gibi bauzas: the bug is ther until the dest is upgraded
16:44:00 bauzas we say we gonna rely on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/791135
16:44:26 bauzas but correct me if I'm wrong, this won't happen for a A to B livemig if A is old, nope ?
16:44:56 bauzas this chit-chat limbo dance between two hosts is confusing
16:45:09 bauzas I never know which compute runs which codepath
16:45:11 gibi this patch trying to fix a bug that happens on the dest after the live migration finished
16:45:27 gibi at that point there is no return to the source host
16:45:56 gibi Amit fixed that in this case we set the instance to point to the dest host so a hard reboot can recover the instance
16:46:24 bauzas but we backported Amit's patch, right?
16:46:29 gibi yes
16:46:36 bauzas ok, so we're safe
16:46:46 gibi Uggla had a case where a very similar failure could leave the instance in Migarting state
16:47:00 gibi this fix is putting the instance in error in this case too
16:47:12 bauzas I see
16:47:35 bauzas ok, then to answer Uggla's question, I don't see any controversy to backport such change once we merge it
16:47:58 gibi yepp
16:48:24 Uggla down to ?
16:48:34 gibi the same version as Amit's
16:48:40 bauzas yup
16:48:48 gibi I think that is proposed back to train
16:48:49 bauzas which is train iirc
16:48:52 bauzas yup
16:49:04 bauzas but as we said, we're on hold on wallaby
16:49:13 bauzas nothing prevents us to do the work tho
16:50:23 bauzas can we end the meeting then ?
16:50:55 Uggla ok 4 me.
16:51:08 gibi nothing else from me
16:51:57 bauzas then
16:51:59 bauzas thanks all
16:52:04 opendevmeet Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-01-31-16.00.log.html
16:52:04 opendevmeet Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-01-31-16.00.txt
16:52:04 opendevmeet Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-01-31-16.00.html
16:52:04 opendevmeet Meeting ended Tue Jan 31 16:52:04 2023 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
16:52:04 bauzas #endmeeting
16:55:40 elodilles thanks o/
16:56:15 kashyap sean-k-mooney: Running the stable/xena locally gives me this yak to shave - https://paste.opendev.org/show/bsRpOt3yk8k6LUw5D9P0/
16:57:50 elodilles kashyap: maybe i'm wrong but this can be fixed by updating/installing explicitly setuptools?
16:58:07 kashyap Probably; I'm on Fedora 36
16:58:25 kashyap elodilles: I'm trying to see if this erroneous failure of stable/xena related to my backport or not (it doesn't seem so)
16:58:28 kashyap https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/796a6b05d72c4bbd87a3375028d43a1f
16:58:39 kashyap This one: nova.tests.unit.virt.libvirt.test_driver.LibvirtConnTestCase.test_check_can_live_migrate_dest_numa_lm [0.046959s]
16:58:43 kashyap (And that's the backport - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851205)
16:59:22 sean-k-mooney oh thats a known issue
16:59:51 elodilles yes, a known one and fixed in upstream gate i think
16:59:55 sean-k-mooney use_2to3 was remvoed in a setuptools verison
17:00:29 kashyap elodilles: Ah, thx. gibi also pointed that there's a rename, hence the fail: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/871975
17:00:32 kashyap Thanks, gibi!
17:00:35 sean-k-mooney https://github.com/gibizer/openstack-tox-docker/blob/main/ussuri/Dockerfile
17:00:38 gibi I thiunk the yoga container from here https://github.com/gibizer/openstack-tox-docker work on xena too
17:00:52 sean-k-mooney gibi: yes it does
17:01:10 sean-k-mooney kashyap: we swapped form the unmaintained suds_junko repo to a differnt one
17:01:26 sean-k-mooney but that is not your issue
17:01:53 sean-k-mooney you will need to clamp your pip/virtualevn and tox version
17:03:49 elodilles yepp. in upstream xena has newer versions (ubuntu) that's why we needed this up till ussuri ( https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/810461 )
17:04:22 elodilles so i guess, in fedora this is needed in xena as well
17:16:15 opendevreview Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui proposed openstack/nova master: api: extend evacuate instance to support target state https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/858384
17:16:45 sahid addressed minor comments from Rajesh Tailor, thank you !
18:32:32 dansmith sean-k-mooney: gibi bauzas: Things like this https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/872204 are incredibly difficult to make "work" in the functional tests because of all the ways and patterns we start and restart multiple fake computes
18:33:23 bauzas gdam shit
18:33:40 dansmith how terrible would it be if we just always mock out those host consistency checks in functionals and rely on unit testing to cover them, and the tempest jobs to really cover the regular happy path(s) ?
18:34:13 dansmith because the levels of stupid mocking to get even some of them to pass are probably worse and more complex than just not ever running those in the functionals
18:35:34 bauzas dansmith: I need to look at your failures but unfortunately I need to quit today (EOB)
18:36:28 dansmith bauzas: okay well, I'm just talking about a general read on the principle of the thing, but ... okay
18:37:27 bauzas dansmith: if you want, mock them indeed and just leave the unittests for checking them

Earlier   Later