| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2023-11-21 | |||
| 17:30:55 | sean-k-mooney | we coudl not supprot the cpu state policy | |
| 17:31:09 | sean-k-mooney | but even then i would expect new config optiosn for the cpu share set | |
| 17:31:17 | gibi | I don't want to alway use the on/off button when my room becomes cold. I want to rely on the combination of the two config to dyanmically heat my room | |
| 17:31:21 | sean-k-mooney | im not sure we will add that funcitonaltiy | |
| 17:31:31 | sean-k-mooney | at least right now i dont see a uescase to do that | |
| 17:32:51 | bauzas | you know what ? I'll stop | |
| 17:34:26 | gibi | I stop too. See you tomorrow | |
| 17:35:14 | bauzas | I sent it to... wait, actually nothing | |
| 17:35:20 | bauzas | the check pipeline failed | |
| 17:35:40 | bauzas | but I added a label called 'Workflow +1' | |
| 17:35:42 | bauzas | fwiw | |
| 17:36:02 | gibi | bauzas: thanks | |
| 17:40:29 | bauzas | (fwiw, the analogy with a room heater seems wrong to me : the on/off button seems to me the opt-in flag about power management, and the temp knob is the strategy) | |
| 17:41:21 | bauzas | and when I wrote the feature, I thought it was errorprone to tell "I want my cores to be power managed" if I wasn't providing dedicated cores | |
| 17:42:00 | bauzas | but I don't want to debate for so long about that, so let's ship it | |
| 17:42:02 | sean-k-mooney | the temp knob is hte cpu_dedicated_set (the quantiy of cpus) but i get your perspective too | |
| 17:44:21 | bauzas | if some deployment tool automatically enables the power management feature, it still needs to properly document the fact that the strategy can be modifed | |
| 17:44:42 | bauzas | maybe some operators would be surprised to see their cores offlined | |
| 17:44:59 | bauzas | (at least I would) | |
| 17:45:24 | sean-k-mooney | well that kind of raise the question of what the defautl behavior shoudl be upstream | |
| 17:45:25 | bauzas | and maybe it wouldn't hit me that it was nova which offlined them for my usage | |
| 17:45:34 | sean-k-mooney | i think we eventually woudl want to make that the default | |
| 17:45:47 | sean-k-mooney | perhasp even this cycle although that should be a seperate patch | |
| 17:46:10 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: the problem here is that I don't want us to buy a feature that depends on a kernel support | |
| 17:46:42 | sean-k-mooney | this has been supported in the kernel for a very very long time, although you ar ecorrect that it can be compiled out | |
| 17:46:46 | bauzas | I don't know for exotic archs and kernels, but I don't wanna bet that all of them have the sysfs calls | |
| 17:46:55 | sean-k-mooney | or disabeld such as when in a vm | |
| 17:47:20 | sean-k-mooney | so you dont think we shoudl enabel by default in the long term then? | |
| 17:47:52 | sean-k-mooney | its certnely not somethign we have to rush into | |
| 17:47:53 | bauzas | I have some concerns about it and I need to be convinced that nova wouldn't stop supporting exotic kernels just because of that | |
| 17:48:17 | sean-k-mooney | kind of like being secure by default i feel we shoudl try to be energy effiect by default | |
| 17:48:36 | bauzas | sure, and that makes sense | |
| 17:48:39 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: well you could alwasy trun it off or we coudl try and detect it | |
| 17:48:49 | bauzas | we should even | |
| 17:48:58 | sean-k-mooney | prehasp we woudl intoduce an auto value in the future | |
| 17:49:10 | bauzas | detecting whether you can disable them or not at startup | |
| 17:49:21 | sean-k-mooney | ya | |
| 17:49:23 | bauzas | yeah, this sounds a right way | |
| 17:49:26 | bauzas | the auto thing | |
| 17:49:39 | sean-k-mooney | so if mede it a tri state true,false,auto | |
| 17:49:44 | sean-k-mooney | and then did the detection | |
| 17:49:51 | sean-k-mooney | that would be the best of both worlds | |
| 17:50:08 | sean-k-mooney | and it solves the ux problem but i also agree that would not be backportable | |
| 17:50:10 | bauzas | yeah, and this would convince me of opting-out this | |
| 17:50:25 | bauzas | provided the autodetect | |
| 17:51:14 | sean-k-mooney | do we ant to wait to disucss this with gibi tomorrow before proceeding with the current patch | |
| 17:54:33 | bauzas | this is additive | |
| 17:54:40 | bauzas | and as you said, not backportable | |
| 19:37:56 | opendevreview | Andriy Kurilin proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Disable NEUTRON_ENFORCE_SCOPE at function job https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/901621 | |
| 20:41:56 | opendevreview | Elod Illes proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: [stable-only] Remove nova-emulation from check pipeline of Yoga https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901604 | |
| 20:44:05 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: i forgot about the [stable-only] tag /o\ so now i've moved the job to experimental pipeline as you originally wanted ^^^ | |
| 21:06:06 | opendevreview | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Allow live migrate paused instance when post copy is enabled https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/444517 | |
| 21:09:41 | artom | melwitt, since you looked at it previously and sean-k-mooney now has a +2, can I bother you for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/883682? | |
| 21:11:20 | andreykurilin | Hi folks! python-novaclient-functional job became broken after neutron-related change to devstack https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/899306 . I have a fix to unblock novaclient’s CI - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/901621 but IDK whether the issue should be addressed differently. The review is appreciated. | |
| 21:16:28 | melwitt | artom: sure, will look | |
| #openstack-nova - 2023-11-22 | |||
| 01:14:20 | opendevreview | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Allow live migrate paused instance when post copy is enabled https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/444517 | |
| 07:55:33 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Allow enabling cpu_power_management with 0 dedicated CPUs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901188 | |
| 08:29:31 | opendevreview | likui proposed openstack/nova master: Add py311 in tox file https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901587 | |
| 08:38:10 | opendevreview | likui proposed openstack/nova master: Add py311 in tox file https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901587 | |
| 09:11:28 | opendevreview | Pierre Libeau proposed openstack/nova master: nova-condutor put instance in error state https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901655 | |
| 09:22:16 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.2: Do not manage CPU0's state https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901566 | |
| 09:22:39 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.1: Do not manage CPU0's state https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901567 | |
| 09:24:21 | gibi | elodilles bauzas: ^^ power management bugfix backport ^^ | |
| 09:25:14 | gibi | bauzas: this is a differnt bugfix | |
| 09:25:28 | bauzas | oh shit, you're tight | |
| 09:25:31 | bauzas | right* | |
| 09:26:37 | bauzas | ETOOMANYTHINGSINMIND | |
| 09:26:41 | bauzas | +2d | |
| 09:26:48 | bauzas | (the bobcat one) | |
| 09:28:31 | gibi | thanks! | |
| 09:29:59 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.2: Allow enabling cpu_power_management with 0 dedicated CPUs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901656 | |
| 09:30:13 | gibi | bauzas: now it is the time to look away ^^ ;) | |
| 09:30:25 | bauzas | lol | |
| 09:31:12 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.1: Allow enabling cpu_power_management with 0 dedicated CPUs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901660 | |
| 09:35:37 | dvo-plv | Hello, All Maybe you will have a chance to review spec file and patch today | |
| 09:35:38 | dvo-plv | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/895924 | |
| 09:35:43 | dvo-plv | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/876075 | |
| 10:47:53 | auniyal6 | Hi bauzas, sean-k-mooney can you please approve this one again https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901604 | |
| 13:48:15 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/yoga: [stable-only] Remove nova-emulation from check pipeline of Yoga https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901604 | |
| 14:45:39 | opendevreview | Andriy Kurilin proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: [DNM] Try to debug functional https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/901677 | |
| 14:53:06 | opendevreview | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Cap with max_instances GPU types https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/899625 | |
| 14:53:29 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: fwiw, my capping vpgu bugfix is now done ^ | |
| 14:53:47 | bauzas | you can test it if you want, it also works with non-SRIOV GPUs | |
| 17:47:46 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/yoga: libvirt: remove default cputune shares value https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/898554 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2023-11-23 | |||
| 01:05:34 | melwitt | gmann: there is a patch to unblock the python-novaclient gate https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/901621 that I have +2ed that you might want to look at. it's a very weird thing with failing when NEUTRON_ENFORCE_SCOPE = true | |
| 02:54:32 | gmann | melwitt: checking | |
| 03:01:05 | gmann | melwitt: done, yeah strange error. seeing from old and new rule existing token should pass either it is admin or member role token | |
| 04:36:10 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Disable NEUTRON_ENFORCE_SCOPE at function job https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/901621 | |
| 07:58:55 | opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: Detect maximum number of SEV guests automatically https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/899381 | |
| 08:00:27 | tkajinam | sean-k-mooney, bauzas ^^^ I've created as bp https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/libvirt-detect-sev-max-guests and link it from the change, as suggested | |
| 08:00:40 | tkajinam | I've not created any bp for a while so lmk if I made something wrong ... | |
| 08:41:40 | gibi | tkajinam: good to see you around :) The BP looks good to me | |
| 08:42:58 | gibi | bauzas: ^^ do we need to wait for the next nova meeting to approve that or we already agreed about the feature and this is just paperwork? | |
| 08:44:34 | tkajinam | gibi, hey. good morning and hope everything is good with you. thanks for checking the bp :-D | |
| 08:49:35 | bauzas | lgtm, I can stamp the paperwork | |
| 08:51:20 | bauzas | tkajinam: gibi: sean-k-mooney: bp approved as specless, good to go for reviews | |
| 08:56:48 | gibi | bauzas: cool | |
| 08:57:09 | gibi | tkajinam: yeah all good here. Hope all good on your side too | |
| 08:57:38 | bauzas | tkajinam: btw. saw your email on tooz | |
| 08:58:04 | bauzas | fwiw, I agree with the concerns, we rather need tooz to continue to verify the older API | |