Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2024-07-12
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
18:52:23 melwitt ok I'll have it updated by then. thanks
18:56:58 sean-k-mooney well dont kill your self to do it over the weekend but if we want to do it this cycle we need to get it landed before spec freze which is thrusday
18:57:46 melwitt I did this to myself 😝 but it also won't kill me. it should be easy (tm)
20:21:33 elodilles sean-k-mooney: no problem :) thanks for the fixes :]
21:19:44 opendevreview Elod Illes proposed openstack/nova master: [tools] Backport validator: handle unmaintained https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924104
21:19:44 opendevreview Elod Illes proposed openstack/nova master: [tools] Ignore bot generated patches https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924103
21:32:05 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova stable/2023.1: Stabilize iso format unit tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923937
#openstack-nova - 2024-07-13
01:14:15 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add config option [quota]strict_unified_limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924025
01:41:09 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add config option [quota]strict_unified_limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924025
02:02:31 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Propose config option to control behavior of unset unified limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/923807
02:04:15 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Propose config option to control behavior of unset unified limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/923807
08:27:08 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: nova-manage: Add flavor scanning to migrate_to_unified_limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924110

Earlier   Later