Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2023-02-10
11:10:42 sean-k-mooney you can also just get the online cores form sysfs
11:11:18 sean-k-mooney if this is an issue but im fine with using libvirt's api for this
11:16:12 bauzas I'm done with the new rev, just updating the upper patch now
11:24:22 sean-k-mooney my steamdeck is charging so im currently still at my work laptop.(playing factorio) so gibi if your happy to review bauzas serise and it looks good to you ping me when your done and i can then do a final pass over it quickly and we can likely merge that today. with that said i have a doctors apointmen in a littel over 3 hours so ill be away after that.
11:24:38 bauzas that's a love
11:24:52 auniyal O/
11:24:57 gibi sean-k-mooney: ack
11:25:04 auniyal in devstack is there a way to see nova-manage logs
11:25:20 bauzas I'm honestly torn, I don't know whether we should really pay attention to ignoring errors
11:25:36 bauzas and whether we should be cautious
11:25:55 bauzas honestly, we create a temp dir, so I don't except problems besides the full disk problem
11:26:11 sean-k-mooney you should not get any now with the way the fixture works
11:26:17 bauzas so I'll turn into using the .cleanup() method
11:26:22 bauzas and meh
11:26:30 bauzas meh to ignoring errors
11:26:42 gibi I'm fine ignoring errors
11:26:49 gibi during delete of a temp dir
11:27:00 gibi we will never reuse the temp dir as it has a random postfix
11:27:05 sean-k-mooney the flag is only there in 3.10
11:27:09 gibi if my /tmp fills up that is on me
11:27:10 sean-k-mooney and we need to support 3.8
11:27:17 gibi aah
11:27:21 bauzas gibi: that's the problem
11:27:26 sean-k-mooney so its fine for it to error
11:27:28 sean-k-mooney it wont
11:27:29 gibi ahh
11:27:30 bauzas we can't say 'ignore errors' if we use cleanup
11:27:38 bauzas hence me torn
11:27:41 gibi I'm fine both ways
11:27:41 sean-k-mooney i could have errored when we had the copy of sysfs because of some permision
11:27:51 sean-k-mooney but now its just normal files owned by us
11:27:54 bauzas correct
11:28:00 gibi if it starts failing on cleanup then we will switch to shutil
11:28:01 sean-k-mooney so it wont error unless there is a disk issue which si out of scope
11:28:08 bauzas yup, this ^
11:28:09 sean-k-mooney +1
11:28:44 bauzas I'll add a comment explaining the risk and how to mitigate it if we see it in CI
11:29:39 gibi cool
11:39:48 bauzas sean-k-mooney: gibi: I haven't yet written the docs patch as it requires a bit of effort, so I'll keep your comments on it unresolved but don't misunderstand me, surely I'll do it in a subsequent patch once I'm done (monday morning hopefully)
11:39:58 bauzas I just wanna give chance to other people to get reviewed
11:40:14 gibi bauzas: sure, doc is OK after FF
11:40:22 sean-k-mooney ya it can be a seperate patch
11:40:47 bauzas the core #0 note is actually very important
11:40:49 bauzas TIL about it
11:41:13 bauzas but yeah that makes sense from an OS perspective
11:41:21 bauzas you always rely on that core to be available
11:41:50 bauzas that's the most portable assumption
11:42:04 sean-k-mooney ya it generally need one core that can always be used to handel interupts and you know turn on the others
11:43:14 sean-k-mooney bauzas: that is why there is no online file in /sys/bus/cpu/devices/cpu0/
11:43:24 sean-k-mooney but there is in all the rest
11:44:07 bauzas ooooooooh
11:44:39 bauzas but you can write an online file and set 0 into it for core #0, right ?
11:45:13 bauzas that's quite a destructive CPU equivalent of disk's rm -rf /
11:45:25 bauzas except it's stateless
11:49:40 sean-k-mooney it will be ignored
11:49:55 sean-k-mooney you can create that file but it wont do anything as far as i am aware
11:50:52 sean-k-mooney by the way https://github.com/SeanMooney/arbiterd/blob/master/src/arbiterd/common/cpu.py#L58-L62
11:51:02 sean-k-mooney is how i got the aviable cpus
11:52:02 sean-k-mooney gibi: bauzas actully also for context
11:52:04 sean-k-mooney https://github.com/SeanMooney/arbiterd/blob/master/src/arbiterd/common/cpu.py#L106-L107
11:52:14 sean-k-mooney that default 1 was because of this
11:52:19 bauzas gtk
11:52:24 sean-k-mooney https://github.com/SeanMooney/arbiterd/blob/master/src/arbiterd/common/cpu.py#L106-L114
11:52:35 sean-k-mooney thats also why i did the get_online check in set online
11:52:46 sean-k-mooney to not do the write
11:52:59 sean-k-mooney i proably should have left a code comment for that...
11:53:26 sean-k-mooney ye removed that optimisation but that was actully the real reason i did that in the poc. it was not an optimisation
11:53:37 sean-k-mooney it was to workaround the cpu0 weridness
11:54:28 sean-k-mooney although to be fair i didnt fix that on the set offline path
11:54:30 sean-k-mooney so meh
12:04:01 opendevreview Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: let CPUs be power managed https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/821228
12:04:02 opendevreview Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: Enable cpus when an instance is spawning https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/868237
12:04:06 bauzas gibi: sean-k-mooney: ^
12:04:23 bauzas and after that, will take my pen for reviewing series
13:28:21 gibi bauzas: on it
13:28:29 bauzas ack
13:32:16 opendevreview Andre Aranha proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: [stable-only] Test setting the nova job to centos-9-stream https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860087
13:36:21 gibi bauzas: I'm +2 +A on the power management series
13:37:32 bauzas gibi: thanks
13:38:11 gibi it was a self contained patch series with well splitted commits. so it was a plesure to review
13:38:49 bauzas I'll add in the etherpad the promised docs patch
13:41:35 gibi I will check the evac fup now
13:54:44 gibi bauzas: I'm not sure https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:privsep-usage-review is at a landeable state
13:55:13 gibi I think the two patches there are only pre-reqs for the real move but I can be mistaken
13:55:44 bauzas I need to open those links
13:55:54 bauzas ideally, I'd like a migration plan
13:56:07 bauzas something we could merge on a step way
13:56:45 bauzas but yeah, I assume this blueprint would be marked Complete once we pull all the callers out of the privsep.py modules
13:57:42 sean-k-mooney they can be merged increentally but i dont think there is enough done in those to see a benifit in A
13:57:51 sean-k-mooney i would proably wait till early next cycle
13:58:19 sean-k-mooney that said i have not really reviewed it so there might be more there then i think
13:58:25 sean-k-mooney i would not rush it however
13:58:30 bauzas yeah maybe
13:58:37 bauzas shit. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/873300 got again trampled
13:58:46 bauzas our gate is still onhold
14:02:35 gibi bauzas: there a global requirement bump https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/872065 that is RED due to nova. And it blocks bumping os-traits to 2.10.0 in global requirements which in turn blocks the manila series and the https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:bp%252Flibvirt-maxphysaddr-support impl
14:03:36 bauzas damn shit.
14:03:47 bauzas we're constructing a pile of cards
14:04:14 gibi yeah
14:04:21 bauzas wait

Earlier   Later