| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2023-02-15 | |||
| 17:30:40 | sean-k-mooney | but i tought wee were also going to do a release of novaclinet to unblock artom patch | |
| 17:31:03 | bauzas | we did | |
| 17:31:04 | sean-k-mooney | oh ok what does that do | |
| 17:31:11 | bauzas | and it was merged yesterday | |
| 17:31:19 | bauzas | now we only have OSC patch up | |
| 17:32:01 | sean-k-mooney | oh 2.95 is the evacuate one | |
| 17:32:11 | sean-k-mooney | oh right that has been blocked in ci | |
| 17:32:19 | sean-k-mooney | ok that makes sense | |
| 17:32:42 | bauzas | iirc, 2.94 and 2.95 were noop on the client side | |
| 17:33:03 | bauzas | this is just for saying that novaclient actually supports those microversion calls, that's it | |
| 17:36:25 | sean-k-mooney | its adding help text and a devstack functional test | |
| 17:36:33 | sean-k-mooney | but its not strictly required | |
| 17:36:38 | bauzas | the OSC patch ? ya | |
| 17:36:46 | sean-k-mooney | yep | |
| 17:36:54 | bauzas | and I think sahid abandoned his OSC patch | |
| 17:37:04 | sean-k-mooney | i asked artom to add docs saying that as of microverison ... fqdns are supported | |
| 17:37:04 | bauzas | since no really support was required | |
| 17:37:27 | bauzas | but that can be addressed after ff | |
| 17:37:39 | sean-k-mooney | if the osc team is fine wiht that yes | |
| 17:38:04 | sean-k-mooney | as i said its just help text really | |
| 17:38:58 | bauzas | yeah it's out of our scope anyway | |
| 17:39:16 | bauzas | fwiw, if someone tells me gate is great, I just send that https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/872413 | |
| 17:39:44 | bauzas | like I already said, I'm no longer a core reviewer | |
| 17:39:52 | bauzas | my name should be "core rechecker" | |
| 17:40:47 | bauzas | https://zuul.openstack.org/status#openstack/nova | |
| 17:44:22 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: -1d https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/873537 | |
| 17:45:47 | bauzas | (and +1d https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/873515 ) | |
| 17:45:58 | gmann | bauzas: ok, agree to move 864594 to bobcat. do not want to rush at last movement. | |
| 17:46:15 | bauzas | gmann: ack and thanks for your dedication | |
| 17:46:45 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: im ok with the feature bump for novaclient instead of bugfix | |
| 17:46:50 | sean-k-mooney | so makes sense | |
| 17:47:57 | sean-k-mooney | osc-placement also makes sesne | |
| 17:55:06 | spatel | sean-k-mooney quick question, I have ceph storage backed openstack today ceph went down because of power | |
| 17:55:48 | spatel | now ceph is back but when i start VMs its getting stuck in boot script no available boot disk | |
| 17:56:22 | spatel | SeaBIOS POST script getting that message. | |
| 17:56:53 | spatel | logs are clean no errors related ceph in nova logs | |
| 17:57:59 | spatel | it stuck here - https://paste.opendev.org/show/bPcyI5UPi0PWoN7iUX2J/ | |
| 17:59:39 | spatel | I found this when searching - https://bugs.launchpad.net/kolla/+bug/1688496 | |
| 18:30:38 | elodilles | bauzas: ok, i see you have found the generated release patches :) | |
| 18:30:54 | elodilles | bauzas: btw, requirements gate fix has landed | |
| 18:32:28 | elodilles | i've rechecked the os-traits. now we have to wait for the ci jobs to finish | |
| 19:28:27 | mnaser | question: do you have to enable the new scope enforcement for the reader role to work? | |
| 19:44:17 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Factor out a mixin class for candidate aware filters https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/854929 | |
| 19:47:19 | gmann | mnaser: we enabled the scope/new-defaults by default which enforce reader role by default https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866218 | |
| 19:48:36 | gmann | mnaser: it is on master which is not yet released. for older release yes you need to enable these two flags in nova.conf to enforce reader role . [oslo_policy] enforce_scope = True enforce_new_defaults = True | |
| 19:52:51 | mnaser | gmann: so it’s not possible to just have enforce new defaults only without scope? I’m mostly worried about Horizon :) | |
| 19:54:49 | gmann | mnaser: scope for all the policy rule is 'project' now so enabling the scope is to reject the system scope token at early stage with 403. existing project scope token keep working whether scope is enabled or disabled | |
| 19:55:48 | gmann | but yes, you can keep only new defaults enable which will work fine unless system scoped token is used | |
| 19:56:28 | gmann | with scope disabled system scope token may fail (for project level resources) later on as they do not have project id | |
| 19:58:01 | gmann | I think horizon is using project scoped token (they have not changed it for srabc) so scope enable/disable should not impact there | |
| 19:59:51 | gmann | kolla was the one who were using system scope for nova which is now fixed https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/kolla-ansible/+/870879 | |
| 20:00:21 | gmann | other than that no body reported if new defaults or scope enable has impacted them | |
| 20:10:46 | mnaser | gmann: oh I see, so as of now, as long as we don’t have custom policies, we should be able to flip it on? | |
| 20:13:11 | gmann | mnaser: yeah | |
| 20:13:38 | mnaser | gmann: ok we’ll flip that and see how it goes! Thank you. | |
| #openstack-nova - 2023-02-16 | |||
| 03:44:53 | opendevreview | Hiroki Narukawa proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: retry libvirt connection on live_migration_monitor https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867077 | |
| 08:05:04 | opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: Fix wrong description about minimum values https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/874061 | |
| 08:52:00 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: db: Resolve additional SAWarning warnings https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/874065 | |
| 08:57:49 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: db: Resolve additional SAWarning warnings https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/874066 | |
| 09:30:20 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: db: Resolve additional SAWarning warnings https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/874069 | |
| 09:31:45 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/victoria: db: Resolve additional SAWarning warnings https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/874071 | |
| 09:32:37 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/ussuri: db: Resolve additional SAWarning warnings https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/874072 | |
| 09:45:43 | elodilles | bauzas gibi : i don't know whether you noticed, but os-traits 2.10.0 is in the upper constraints \o/ | |
| 09:49:23 | bauzas | elodilles: clap clap | |
| 09:49:28 | bauzas | thanks for the dedication | |
| 09:50:43 | elodilles | np | |
| 09:52:04 | gibi | thanks folks | |
| 09:52:29 | bauzas | gibi: do we need to modify placement to support those traits ? AFAIR yes | |
| 09:52:35 | gibi | bauzas: yes | |
| 09:52:44 | bauzas | I can work on that | |
| 09:53:00 | gibi | feel free to ping me for review | |
| 09:53:07 | bauzas | (provided I easily find the pattern) | |
| 09:53:22 | gibi | bauzas: I think it is just a bump in requirements.txt nothing more | |
| 09:53:25 | gibi | the rest is automatic | |
| 09:53:47 | gibi | placement loads all the trait defs from whathever os-traits lib it founds at startup | |
| 09:53:47 | bauzas | aren't we checking the number of traits we support ? | |
| 09:53:49 | bauzas | I thought so | |
| 09:53:59 | gibi | I think we fixed that check | |
| 09:55:35 | gibi | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/851966 | |
| 09:56:55 | bauzas | gibi: great | |
| 10:14:25 | bauzas | gibi: hah, fun, we forgot to bump the reqs for 2.9.0 https://github.com/openstack/placement/blob/master/requirements.txt#L29 | |
| 10:15:02 | bauzas | gibi: but since we don't pin on a release, we should get 2.10 | |
| 10:15:32 | bauzas | so technically, it's more about saying that for 2023.1 Placement will always support those traits are bare min | |
| 10:15:39 | bauzas | as* bare | |
| 10:24:39 | gibi | bauzas: yeah that is still on me to have a limited lower constraint job running on placement and nova to catch these as we only test with upper today | |
| 10:25:05 | gibi | I tried to do that after the last PTG but it was non trivial so I never finished it | |
| 10:25:09 | bauzas | cool, we haven't branched RC1 yet so we're on time | |
| 10:25:31 | bauzas | for the moment, we need to just make sure we document this | |
| 10:27:42 | gibi | I believe more in systems that enforces rules than documentation that we don't read when we should | |
| 10:29:51 | opendevreview | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/placement master: Update 2023.1 reqs to support os-traits 2.10 as min version https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/874080 | |
| 10:30:02 | bauzas | we have the PTL docs that I personnally enforce :) | |
| 10:30:44 | bauzas | gibi: sean-k-mooney: time for a placement review https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/874080 | |
| 10:30:57 | gibi | bauzas: +@ | |
| 10:30:58 | gibi | bauzas: +2 | |
| 10:56:46 | bauzas | nova-next is getting me mad | |
| 10:57:26 | bauzas | https://storage.bhs.cloud.ovh.net/v1/AUTH_dcaab5e32b234d56b626f72581e3644c/zuul_opendev_logs_e4a/821228/7/gate/nova-next/e4ab52f/testr_results.html is anthologic | |
| 10:57:37 | bauzas | volume timeouts + guest kernel tainting | |
| 11:02:02 | opendevreview | Tobias Urdin proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: update description for live_migration_completion_timeout https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/874083 | |
| 12:21:20 | gibi | bauzas: is this with the new cirros version? | |
| 12:23:10 | bauzas | gibi: nope, we haven't merged yet the change | |