| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2024-07-11 | |||
| 16:58:55 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2024.1: Add iso file format inspector https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923724 | |
| 16:59:00 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2024.1: fix qemu-img version dependent tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923878 | |
| 17:28:44 | opendevreview | keerthivasan proposed openstack/nova master: Move nova-manage db purge to nova-audit https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/708783 | |
| 17:44:52 | opendevreview | keerthivasan proposed openstack/nova master: Move nova-manage db purge to nova-audit https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/708783 | |
| 17:57:11 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Stabilize iso format unit tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923924 | |
| 19:24:57 | opendevreview | Jens Harbott proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: Test devstack change https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923759 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2024-07-12 | |||
| 02:21:55 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add config option [quota]strict_unified_limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924025 | |
| 07:32:49 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add config option [quota]strict_unified_limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924025 | |
| 07:35:55 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: ^ POC attempt at the different logic we chatted about the other day | |
| 08:04:53 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.2: fix qemu-img version dependent tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923907 | |
| 08:04:54 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.2: Stabilize iso format unit tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923936 | |
| 08:09:01 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.1: fix qemu-img version dependent tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923908 | |
| 08:09:02 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.1: Stabilize iso format unit tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923937 | |
| 09:38:01 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: oh cool. after creating that how do you feel about one approch vs the other. no need to reply now but let me know after you get some sleep | |
| 10:09:04 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: could you approve https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923935 to continue landing the series? | |
| 10:09:48 | gibi | most of the 2023.2 is also on the gate now thanks to elodilles | |
| 10:13:59 | sean-k-mooney | i for got to clice the buttons and only left a commet ... | |
| 10:14:02 | sean-k-mooney | but done now | |
| 10:15:25 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: thanks, could you review the same patch on the older branches? Then I can just ping elodilles when we need the approve | |
| 10:15:50 | sean-k-mooney | already am | |
| 10:17:25 | sean-k-mooney | ok i think im +2 on all the ones i didnt push | |
| 10:27:09 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2023.2: port format inspector tests from glance https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923727 | |
| 10:27:14 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2023.2: Reproduce iso regression with deep format inspection https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923728 | |
| 11:18:47 | frickler | gibi: sean-k-mooney: gate failure in openstacksdk-functional-devstack on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923729 . if you can double check that it is unrelated, I'd submit it right back into gate again | |
| 11:20:48 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2024.1: Stabilize iso format unit tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923935 | |
| 11:20:54 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2023.1: port format inspector tests from glance https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923731 | |
| 11:21:00 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2023.1: Reproduce iso regression with deep format inspection https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923732 | |
| 11:41:53 | vicent | Good morning! I am using sriov, I have two PFs with two VFs each. The PFs are connected to different networks, so when I create a neutron port with type direct, I need a way to map that port so it uses one of the VFs of a specific PF. I found this document https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/zed/approved/pci-device-tracking-in-placement.html which uses traits, but I need to set | |
| 11:41:59 | vicent | the trait on the port, not on the flavor. Basically, how can I configure the VFs of different PF in pools, so I have control to which VF pool is used for which network? I managed to get my PFs as resource providers on placement and I my ports get correctly bound to the VFs, but I can't control the mapping to a specific custom trait. How does nova request a specific resource provider for the port? | |
| 11:42:05 | vicent | Is there a way to do what I am trying to do? | |
| 11:43:29 | sean-k-mooney | vicent: the only way to do that today is to use a differnt neutron phsynet for each PF | |
| 11:44:04 | sean-k-mooney | there is no support for anti affintiy or vf bonding in openstack today | |
| 11:44:19 | sean-k-mooney | some have tried to hack it in without enableing it in nova or neutron | |
| 11:44:29 | sean-k-mooney | melonox have some vf lag supprot | |
| 11:44:39 | sean-k-mooney | but its not officaly supproted in nova or neutorn | |
| 11:45:17 | vicent | I can't use physnet in my case :S | |
| 11:45:31 | vicent | Do you have a link to the mellanox resource? | |
| 11:45:37 | sean-k-mooney | then unfortunetly you cant do this in openstack | |
| 11:46:11 | sean-k-mooney | the proibelme with the melxons approch si there is no awarenss of it in nova ans no schduler supprot as a result | |
| 11:46:22 | sean-k-mooney | there is alos no way to request it as an end user | |
| 11:46:38 | sean-k-mooney | it done out fo band bay howe you confirg the host hardware | |
| 11:46:43 | vicent | ok, then it won't work for me either | |
| 11:47:07 | sean-k-mooney | https://www.stackhpc.com/vflag-kayobe.html | |
| 11:49:04 | vicent | does nova have any plugin/extension mechanism that could be used to control that? | |
| 11:49:16 | sean-k-mooney | no | |
| 11:50:23 | vicent | so if I wanted to get that, I would need to modify nova directly... Ok | |
| 11:50:30 | sean-k-mooney | as i said the only way to do anti affinity at the pf/vf level is with physnets | |
| 11:51:14 | sean-k-mooney | yes and form an upstream poitn of view we do not plann to supprot this until neutron has a bonding api similer to trunk ports | |
| 11:51:37 | sean-k-mooney | which was discuss a few years ago but no one is currently working on that | |
| 11:51:44 | vicent | My use case is not for bonding | |
| 11:52:29 | sean-k-mooney | well we also don thave any kind of port grouping or anti affintiy api in neutron that can be used moddel the relationship | |
| 11:52:38 | sean-k-mooney | that really the gap | |
| 11:53:09 | vicent | It is more about scheduling and resource selection, not grouping or anti-affinity | |
| 11:53:31 | sean-k-mooney | right so pci in palcement does nto supprot neutorn prots righ tnow | |
| 11:53:38 | sean-k-mooney | that is planned for a future release | |
| 11:53:39 | vicent | I want to be able to enforce a specific PF on my port without physnet. | |
| 11:54:06 | sean-k-mooney | vicent: well that is somethign we explictly dont support | |
| 11:54:32 | sean-k-mooney | its a disging goal ot not allow you to directly choose the PF on a host | |
| 11:54:46 | sean-k-mooney | you can poticaly abuse traits to support that | |
| 11:55:03 | vicent | well, not the PF, but the any VFs of that PF | |
| 11:55:07 | sean-k-mooney | but we dont intent to allwo that for the same reason we dont support selecting numa nodes or cpus | |
| 11:55:55 | sean-k-mooney | that is simpler to do and can be acive once we supprot neutron sriov prots in placemnet | |
| 11:57:28 | sean-k-mooney | this is the planned desgin https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/2023.1/implemented/pci-device-tracking-in-placement.html#neutron-sr-iov-ports-out-of-scope | |
| 11:58:33 | sean-k-mooney | neutron port can have resouce requests. and if we support triat request via that on the port level it would enable your usecase in a not terrible way | |
| 11:59:04 | sean-k-mooney | however i expect it to be a year or more before we implement that | |
| 11:59:32 | vicent | Ok, that clarifies | |
| 12:00:16 | vicent | I guess I will try with physnet and without placement | |
| 12:00:47 | vicent | Thanks sean-k-mooney | |
| 12:01:14 | sean-k-mooney | the hrrible hack that telcos have done for years is ot have 2 phsnets on the same phsyical netowrk(something your not allowed to do technialy) | |
| 12:01:27 | sean-k-mooney | and create a netron neetwork with the same vlan on both | |
| 12:01:47 | sean-k-mooney | and then one port on each network | |
| 12:02:07 | sean-k-mooney | that allwos them to have one port form each numa node or on diffent phsyical nic | |
| 12:02:17 | sean-k-mooney | depending on how they created the phsynets | |
| 12:03:06 | sean-k-mooney | that breaks tenant isolation as vlans on diffent phsynets are not ment to be able to interact like that | |
| 12:03:20 | sean-k-mooney | but in a private cloud where the network are created by an admin that work for them | |
| 12:30:47 | gibi | frickler: I agree that was an unrealted failure | |
| 12:31:12 | gibi | thanks for monitoring it | |
| 14:48:58 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: test with post-copy enabled https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924075 | |
| 15:31:51 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2023.2: Add iso file format inspector https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923729 | |
| 15:31:58 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2023.2: fix qemu-img version dependent tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923907 | |
| 17:22:37 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: I think I like the second approach more. it turned out to simpler than I expected | |
| 18:16:35 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2023.2: Stabilize iso format unit tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923936 | |
| 18:16:41 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2023.1: Add iso file format inspector https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923733 | |
| 18:16:51 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2023.1: fix qemu-img version dependent tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923908 | |
| 18:39:39 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: you have encapulstaed the logic pretty cleanly into the should_enforce function | |
| 18:40:50 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: im not entirly sure how i feel about caching the keystone client for the limt enfroceer | |
| 18:41:31 | sean-k-mooney | its proably fine if it internally handels updating the auth | |
| 18:41:41 | sean-k-mooney | when a token expires | |
| 18:43:11 | sean-k-mooney | we can have diffent limties per project howver right so w eneed to ensure we are usign the users token to get teh registered limits so we might need to concruct it each time | |
| 18:43:36 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: yeah, I wasn't totally sure about that but I think it does. we cache most of the clients like placement and neutron IIRC | |
| 18:44:03 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: oh.. yeah good point. 😆 | |
| 18:44:17 | sean-k-mooney | dont we normally passs a diffent context to the client wehn making a call | |
| 18:44:21 | sean-k-mooney | with the user token | |
| 18:44:26 | melwitt | yeah you're right | |
| 18:44:54 | melwitt | I'll need to change that | |
| 18:44:55 | sean-k-mooney | so in stead of needign a new keyston section in the config i thin kwe can use the user token + our service user tooken | |
| 18:46:54 | sean-k-mooney | ignoing th eclinet the patch looks pretty nice to me in general | |
| 18:48:54 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: thanks for all the work you have done on the iso fromat backport | |
| 18:49:00 | melwitt | I'll revise the spec to the second approach | |
| 18:50:22 | sean-k-mooney | if your happy with that it works for me. ill try and find time to review the spec and patch properly on monday so | |