| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2023-06-01 | |||
| 09:38:09 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Support resuming an instance with shares (compute and API part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860285 | |
| 09:38:11 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Support rescuing an instance with shares (compute and API part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860288 | |
| 09:38:11 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Support rescuing an instance with shares (driver part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860287 | |
| 09:38:13 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Docs about Manila shares API usage https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/871642 | |
| 09:38:13 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Allow to mount manila share using Cephfs protocol https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/883862 | |
| 09:38:15 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add hw_share_local_fs extra specs and image property https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/884995 | |
| 09:38:15 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add configuration option share_local_fs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/884994 | |
| 09:38:17 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add share_local_fs scheduler filter https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/884997 | |
| 09:38:17 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add LOCAL storage type https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/884996 | |
| 09:38:19 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Manage local share (driver part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/884999 | |
| 09:38:19 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add new api to retrieve local share (object and db) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/884998 | |
| 09:38:21 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Do not mount local share at startup (init_instance) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885001 | |
| 09:38:21 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Manage local share (compute manager part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885000 | |
| 09:38:23 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Support spawn an instance with a local share (driver part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885003 | |
| 09:38:23 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Do not umount local share if instance id deleted https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885002 | |
| 09:38:25 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Support spawn an instance with a local share (compute manager part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885004 | |
| 09:41:02 | Uggla_ | bauzas, ^ should fix what we discussed, I have added what I have done for scaphandre as well on top of the serie. | |
| 09:47:42 | Uggla_ | bauzas, I need to test a couple of things with devstack, then I will try to reorganize the serie to have the API related stuff on the top. | |
| 10:09:09 | opendevreview | Michel Nederlof proposed openstack/nova master: Add ability to flatten RBD disks upon clone https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/884595 | |
| 10:15:53 | bauzas | Uggla_: ack, cooking now | |
| 12:54:08 | Uggla_ | sean-k-mooney[m], can you please remember me the issue with numa and memfd. So far I understand that tweaking numa is not required anymore with As of QEMU 5.0.0 and libvirt 6.9.0. Do I miss something ? | |
| 12:56:07 | sean-k-mooney | i discovered that recently too | |
| 12:56:27 | sean-k-mooney | so your rigt with a new enough qemu memfd does not require numa to be configured | |
| 12:56:42 | sean-k-mooney | so we could start makeing that our default memory backend in nova/libvirt | |
| 12:57:17 | sean-k-mooney | specificaly our default coudl evolve to | |
| 12:57:20 | sean-k-mooney | <memoryBacking> | |
| 12:57:22 | sean-k-mooney | <source type="memfd"/> | |
| 12:57:24 | sean-k-mooney | <access mode="shared"/> | |
| 12:57:26 | sean-k-mooney | </memoryBacking> | |
| 12:57:52 | sean-k-mooney | that will enable virtio fs and vhost-user to start workign automaticlaly without any special addtional configuration | |
| 12:58:38 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla_: however our current min qemu is 4.2.0 or declared next min is 5.2.0 | |
| 12:58:52 | sean-k-mooney | so we need to actuly raise the min version befoer we do that | |
| 12:59:21 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap was ment to be workign on that but i have not seen any patches yet | |
| 13:02:08 | Uggla_ | sean-k-mooney, as a reminder for virtiofs I require a qemu > 5.0.0 and libvirt > 6.2.0. | |
| 13:03:22 | Uggla_ | sean-k-mooney, anyway assuming I find the time to do it, any objection to write a spec for memfd ? (so we could review it at PTG ?) | |
| 13:04:06 | sean-k-mooney | go for it | |
| 13:04:27 | Uggla_ | sean-k-mooney, thx | |
| 13:04:48 | sean-k-mooney | what i have proposed in the past is adding hw:memory_backend=file|anonumous|memfd|hugepage | |
| 13:04:59 | sean-k-mooney | and if we raise the min then memfd can be the default | |
| 13:05:04 | sean-k-mooney | when its not set | |
| 13:05:43 | Uggla_ | what is anonymous ? | |
| 13:05:56 | sean-k-mooney | what we use today just speeled incorrectly | |
| 13:06:01 | sean-k-mooney | non shared 4k pages | |
| 13:07:46 | Uggla_ | ok you think there will be no "side effect" to switch to memfs as default ? | |
| 13:08:13 | sean-k-mooney | there are sideeffect but i think its a better default. provided we have a new enoguh qemu | |
| 13:08:24 | sean-k-mooney | specificly im suggeting changin two defaults | |
| 13:08:42 | Uggla_ | ok | |
| 13:09:03 | sean-k-mooney | hw:memory_backing=memfd which im suggeting should be the new default woudl set <source type="memfd"/> and <access mode="shared"/> | |
| 13:09:12 | sean-k-mooney | the <access mode="shared"/> is the main delta | |
| 13:09:34 | sean-k-mooney | memfd ensure there is a file decriptor allcoated to the memory segment | |
| 13:10:33 | sean-k-mooney | combinded with <access mode="shared"/> that means dpdk or or other tools that do security scaning tools can map the guest memory an acess it form the host | |
| 13:11:06 | sean-k-mooney | so that will enabel ovs-dpdk to work out of the box without requiring the vm to use hugepages or file backed memory | |
| 13:11:21 | Uggla_ | cool ! | |
| 13:11:41 | sean-k-mooney | and it will make virtio-fs work which is your main usecase enable but the maniall share work you are doing and the scaphanda work | |
| 13:12:19 | sean-k-mooney | the reason for keeping anonymous is for those that dotn what <access mode="shared"/> | |
| 13:12:29 | Uggla_ | yep, it might simplify the host config too. | |
| 13:13:13 | Uggla_ | sure, it good to keep anonymous for people who does not want to use shared mem, for any reason. | |
| 13:13:18 | sean-k-mooney | yes so put to gether a spec and we can debate the default in it but i would be infavor of using memfd as it has may advantages | |
| 13:14:26 | Uggla_ | I agree, will do that. | |
| 13:15:09 | Uggla_ | Another thing, I'm not sure you have seen my note yesterday about virtofs not supporting readonly. Do you thing proposing virtio9p as an alternative to virtiofs could be useful ? | |
| 13:15:41 | Uggla_ | or we should just wait virtiofs to support it ? | |
| 13:17:29 | sean-k-mooney | virtio9p does not apprer to be supported by libvirt | |
| 13:18:31 | sean-k-mooney | oh | |
| 13:18:36 | sean-k-mooney | its an atribute you can set 9pfs | |
| 13:18:42 | Uggla_ | hum are you sure, I can configure it using virtual machine manager, and I think it uses libvirt. | |
| 13:21:19 | sean-k-mooney | it might be setting things qit qemu args | |
| 13:23:40 | Uggla_ | it looks like the conf is: https://paste.opendev.org/show/bC6FS8a7RP2J0tT9G2Jn/ | |
| 13:24:42 | sean-k-mooney | ya so it looks like its the defautl driver if you dont use virtio-fs | |
| 13:26:22 | Uggla_ | I have not dig into it, this is just the conf porposed by virtual machine manager. I'm a bit afraid about the <address type="pci"... as I don't really know the purpose so far. | |
| 13:26:29 | sean-k-mooney | im not sure that readonly is really required but perhaps we should consider it | |
| 13:26:58 | Uggla_ | sean-k-mooney, I have discussed and open a ticket to the virt team to have it supported. | |
| 13:27:03 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla_: thats just the adress in the vm where its mounted | |
| 13:27:18 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla_: we can rely on it however fo the intial enablement | |
| 13:27:39 | sean-k-mooney | we have a policy of rquiring features to be in a released version of libvirt/qemu before we can use it in nova | |
| 13:28:10 | sean-k-mooney | i woudl perhaps isnteead consier addign ahard limit on the virtiofs size and allwo it to be read write | |
| 13:28:18 | sean-k-mooney | but lets see what others think | |
| 13:33:58 | Uggla_ | one of the benefits is that virtio9p seems to not have issue with snapshot etc... but probably less performant than virtiofs. | |
| 13:35:00 | Uggla_ | I think virtio9p does not require shared memory that's the reason why. | |
| 13:38:17 | Uggla_ | sean-k-mooney, regarding virtiofs if we really want ro we can work around it using a bind mount and explain it it the doc. | |
| 13:39:33 | Uggla_ | sean-k-mooney, do you thing it worth to also write a spec for virtio9p ? | |
| 14:13:19 | sean-k-mooney | no | |
| 14:13:28 | sean-k-mooney | i dont think we shoudl add supprot for virtio9p | |
| 14:13:49 | sean-k-mooney | it has much lower performacne and it will likely get remvoed eventully once virtiofs has reach feature partiy | |
| 14:30:41 | opendevreview | Danylo Vodopianov proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add support for Napatech LinkVirt SmartNICs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/859290 | |
| 14:53:38 | opendevreview | Danylo Vodopianov proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add support for Napatech LinkVirt SmartNICs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/859290 | |
| 15:13:24 | opendevreview | Danylo Vodopianov proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add support for Napatech LinkVirt SmartNICs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/859290 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2023-06-02 | |||
| 12:00:50 | opendevreview | Vasyl Saienko proposed openstack/os-vif master: Don't break traffic if port already exists https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/885127 | |
| 12:01:47 | opendevreview | Vasyl Saienko proposed openstack/os-vif master: Don't break traffic if port already exists https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/885127 | |
| 12:04:20 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: we lost your +2 from https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/873216 | |
| 12:04:29 | gibi | ahh sorry | |
| 12:04:38 | gibi | it wasn't review +2 it was prio +2 | |
| 12:04:40 | gibi | then never mind | |
| 12:04:52 | gibi | anyhow I reviewed the fix and I'm +2 on it | |
| 13:28:36 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: i can review it now if your +2 its probly mostly fine | |
| 13:29:37 | sean-k-mooney | actully i think i planned to +2 that previosuly yesterday or the day before | |
| 13:30:49 | sean-k-mooney | ya i had intended to add both CR: +2 and RP: +2 | |
| 15:10:23 | gibi | :) | |
| #openstack-nova - 2023-06-05 | |||
| 11:01:38 | mdbooth | I'll be running a forum session on Kubernetes on OpenStack in Vancouver next week. It's for users and developers of all related projects to talk to each other. Etherpad is here if there's anything you'd like to discuss: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openinfra-2023-kubernetes-on-openstack | |
| 11:57:22 | opendevreview | Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: Reproducer for dangling bdms https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/881457 | |
| 11:57:23 | opendevreview | Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: Delete dangling bdms https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/882284 | |