Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2024-11-20
14:25:55 sean-k-mooney but ok
14:26:03 sean-k-mooney since its already a dep it does not impact packaging
14:26:16 tkajinam we deprecated quobyte support so that code may go away next cycle
14:26:27 sean-k-mooney well it moving form optional to requried but its also requried because fo oslo so i guess its fine
14:26:41 tkajinam yes
14:27:39 sean-k-mooney ok so i have only one other comment, there is no new testcoverage for get_machine_ips
14:28:01 sean-k-mooney you removed https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/931582/6/nova/tests/unit/compute/test_utils.py
14:28:29 sean-k-mooney the error case but didnt provide any repalcement coverage. and with the poison that impoiles this is not called in other tests or is mocked
14:28:51 sean-k-mooney so i dont think we have any coverage of that code.
14:30:00 sean-k-mooney can you add a small testcase that mocks psutil.net_if_addrs() and jsut cover the body of the for
14:30:32 sean-k-mooney i.e. i.e. the removal of the ipv6 adresses? im not sure how hard that would be
14:31:04 sean-k-mooney sory its not remivng the ipv6 adresses
14:31:21 sean-k-mooney btu it is stripign the content after %
14:32:14 tkajinam that removes scope from ipv6 address
14:32:17 sean-k-mooney i guess we didnt have coverate for that before...
14:32:24 tkajinam let me update the change to include unit tests. That's a very good point
14:32:26 sean-k-mooney so its technially not a regression
14:32:51 sean-k-mooney im kind of +1.5
14:33:18 sean-k-mooney i dont have a sense of how worried i shoudl be about a regression in that code
14:33:49 sean-k-mooney you didnt actully chagne andy of the logic that is processing the adresses
14:34:24 sean-k-mooney you just removed the try excpet
14:35:03 sean-k-mooney presumably because `psutil.net_if_addrs().items()` alwasy returns a dict even if its an empty one
14:35:45 sean-k-mooney or well an iterator over a mapping/dict view
14:36:42 tkajinam yeah
14:36:43 sean-k-mooney tkajinam: im kind of feelign that the missing unit test is a prexisiting bug and i should not ask you to fix it while your are fixing the netifaces issue
14:37:45 tkajinam sean-k-mooney, that's also ok. I can add some test coverage in an independent follow-up
14:38:29 tkajinam yeah it reminds me that I only removed the test case because the exception may no be raised in a new implementation and there are no actual test coverage for normal cases
14:40:00 sean-k-mooney i left a coment to that effect and a +2
14:40:38 sean-k-mooney if you have time to add coverage in a followup then that great if not its ok
14:41:10 sean-k-mooney ill leave it to others to disagree on the reivew if they feel differently
14:42:31 tkajinam sean-k-mooney, thank you !
14:44:15 sean-k-mooney frickler: looks liek even with the exteneed timeout it can still sometiems fail
14:45:00 sean-k-mooney i think for now it would be best to skip that test when using the native driver
14:45:32 sean-k-mooney it always passes for the ovs-vsctl one and we can revisti this once the current set of release are done
14:45:45 sean-k-mooney *requirements bumps
14:49:01 sean-k-mooney unfortunetly we do not capture the ovs logs in this job but i suspect there might be an error of some kidn that we can see
14:49:35 sean-k-mooney s/can see/can't see/
15:10:05 ildikov bauzas: sean-k-mooney: Hi, I'm pinging you about the Bridging the Gap effort that we last discussed at the recent PTG.
15:10:08 ildikov We talked about some simple improvements for Nova, like documenting your process to set priorities for the work that's happening during release cycles.
15:11:48 ildikov I was looking into the Nova docs a little bit, and was doing a Google search on this topic as well to see what a newcomer might find when looking for information about how to work with the Nova team.
15:12:07 ildikov I found a page in the Nova docs that talks about specs, blueprints, etc: https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/blueprints.html
15:12:42 ildikov It looks like a good place to add some additional information about processes that the team is using throughout release cycles to organize your work.
15:12:46 ildikov What do you think?
15:13:56 sean-k-mooney that is one place but not the only one we have
15:14:19 sean-k-mooney this is the starting point https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/contributing.html
15:14:38 sean-k-mooney the doc you linked to is fpr mew featire [;ammomg
15:15:11 sean-k-mooney here you will see the more detailed docs https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/index.html
15:16:41 sean-k-mooney ildikov: we maintian an entire subseciton of our docs "the contibutor guide/docs"
15:16:52 sean-k-mooney so we can add more contet to this as required
15:17:12 sean-k-mooney a high level overview of our process is here https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/process.html
15:17:51 sean-k-mooney ildikov: https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/process.html#why-do-we-have-priorities is where we discuss priorities but we have nto enforced them for some time
15:18:21 sean-k-mooney this was the section we added most recently https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/process.html#what-the-review-priority-label-in-gerrit-are-use-for
15:19:03 sean-k-mooney to document how to sue review priority label but bauzas proposed a diffent way to do it via etherpads last cycle which has more or less replaced it
15:19:28 sean-k-mooney we also have old documetion of the runwasy system we used before that https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/process.html#runways
15:19:59 sean-k-mooney ildikov: so i can see why it might be confusitn since we still have to docs for the previous ways of working
15:20:34 sean-k-mooney ildikov: this is somthing that is continuiously evloving as we try thigns for a release or two and then try somethign new
15:21:29 sean-k-mooney so nova has a lot of docs on this topic already but most have not been updated for a few releases
15:22:21 sean-k-mooney ildikov: that partly why i tough the fedback toward nova was rather unfare in the ptg discussions
15:23:25 sean-k-mooney ildikov: it seamed to ignroe all of the existing doc we had and the efforts we had made to make it transparent
16:06:56 dansmith melwitt: okay I see, it's being echoed once because of the manage_output=$() and once for the [[ $manage_output =~ SUCCESS ]]
16:08:37 dansmith melwitt: so it might be better to do this:
16:08:49 dansmith nova_manage blah | tee /tmp/output
16:08:57 dansmith if grep SUCCESS /tmp/output;
16:09:24 dansmith so we get one copy
16:10:05 melwitt the job output is so hard to parse for me :( ok, I'll try that
16:10:06 dansmith also I just realized you're not checking the return code and just looking for the SUCCESS, but a script will be using the former, so we should probably as well yeah?
16:10:59 dansmith yeah I want the job output to be easier to read for sure and not stuffing large multi-line outputs into vars will help I think
16:12:27 melwitt yeah that would work, originally I didn't have it returning non zero for the warning case and I didn't think to change it
16:12:29 melwitt I'll do that also
18:52:22 ildikov sean-k-mooney: thank you for sharing all the links, and some details on how the documentation has been evolving
18:57:25 ildikov sean-k-mooney: I'm sorry the feedback towards the documentation felt unfair. It seems like there might be a challenge for newcomers and casual contributors to find their ways around the currently existing docs, where the disconnect might be.
18:59:13 ildikov sean-k-mooney: You mentioned that some of the docs haven't been updated in a while now. Which parts of the docs should be updated or removed, if any, to accurately reflect how the Nova team works today?
19:13:49 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
19:23:48 melwitt sean-k-mooney: you are fast :)
19:25:47 sean-k-mooney i happend ot be doing my "finsih the day be going through my emails" routine when the notificaoin came in
19:26:22 melwitt woohoo
19:28:58 sean-k-mooney ill try and review the second patch again tomorrow
19:29:18 melwitt cool, thank you
19:30:01 sean-k-mooney i have an older veriosn checked out in one... of my devstack vms
19:30:22 sean-k-mooney i might see if i can try enabeling it and test the basics
19:30:58 melwitt the more testing the better :)
19:33:01 melwitt I realized it wouldn't be the right thing to validate resource classes (for quotas) in init_host() bc that's a nova-compute thing and the quota checking happens in nova-api and nova-conductor. so I'm looking for a similar spot I can add the validation for startup
19:39:43 melwitt oh derp, init_host() can be added for any service I see now
19:41:12 melwitt nova-api needs to be different though bc it won't go through nova.service I don't think
19:44:05 melwitt ok the wsgi app does use a nova Service but calls only Service.create()
19:45:26 sean-k-mooney it does not enven need to be init_host
19:45:46 sean-k-mooney we just need a early point to hook after the config is parsrced
19:45:56 sean-k-mooney so the post start hook woudl work too
19:47:30 sean-k-mooney actully pre_start_hook would work too
19:47:42 sean-k-mooney but ya init_host is my go too
19:50:34 sean-k-mooney melwitt: if your feellign laze it technially could go in __init__ https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/e8a544f0e1134a4b260720cc634ad1997f936d6d/nova/manager.py#L92 but ya init_host or pre_start_hook are proably better
19:52:15 melwitt sean-k-mooney: I think the nova-api wsgi app doesn't go through init_host or pre_start_hook bc it doesn't call Service.start(). so that has to either be done differently or go into __init__ or Service.create
19:53:41 sean-k-mooney is that true... it might be i tough it was common but you might be right
19:53:57 sean-k-mooney i didnt think the manager part changed between the too
19:54:02 dansmith I'm quite sure melwitt is right here
19:54:13 dansmith there's really no service lifecycle for it under wsgi
19:54:26 sean-k-mooney sure but this is not part of the service
19:54:33 melwitt sean-k-mooney: I was looking at this https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/wsgi_app.py#L52
19:54:33 sean-k-mooney its part of the manager
19:54:50 sean-k-mooney the service calls it but init_host is a methond on the manager

Earlier   Later