| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2025-03-25 | |||
| 16:23:15 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: some of the others are nice to have but not required | |
| 16:23:39 | dansmith | backporting test cleanliness doesn't make sense to me unless it's needed for an actual fix | |
| 16:23:57 | gibi | dansmith: for RC2 prespective only https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944105/5 in interesting | |
| 16:24:04 | sean-k-mooney | right the doc i could see for an RC2 but at this point i woudl just wait and do that after the release | |
| 16:24:27 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: oh right to make numa work | |
| 16:24:40 | gibi | dansmith: but as I wrote above it is not an E regression and will only land today | |
| 16:24:43 | dansmith | gibi: ah I missed that one.. that's not really a regression i t seems, but.. | |
| 16:24:49 | dansmith | ack yeah okay | |
| 16:25:00 | gibi | yeah I would not spin an RC2 just for thish | |
| 16:25:10 | gibi | but if there are other things forcing an RC2 ... | |
| 16:25:11 | sean-k-mooney | so we can do a stable release basifcally right after the actual release | |
| 16:25:17 | dansmith | right | |
| 16:25:23 | Uggla | +1 | |
| 16:25:27 | gibi | yeah doing stable backports is the way to go if nothing else forces RC2 | |
| 16:25:27 | sean-k-mooney | so i think RC2 is overkill for any of those | |
| 16:25:44 | sean-k-mooney | sounds like we are all in violent agreement | |
| 16:26:38 | gibi | yepp | |
| 16:26:40 | bauzas | yup | |
| 16:26:46 | bauzas | (sorry, meeting was over) | |
| 16:27:01 | Uggla | bauzas, no still in the meeting | |
| 16:27:17 | bauzas | as a reminder, any new release candidate impacts our distros | |
| 16:27:34 | bauzas | so we definitely only need to provide a RC2 if this is a regression | |
| 16:27:47 | elodilles | (with my release core hat on) anyway, let me know if an RC2 is needed (or not needed) as this week is when we can release a final RC as i said o:) | |
| 16:28:53 | elodilles | (i'll generate final RC patches (where there are merged and unreleased stuff on stable/2025.1) somewhere around 2nd half of the week fwiw) | |
| 16:29:18 | bauzas | ack thanks | |
| 16:29:22 | elodilles | np | |
| 16:30:36 | dansmith | are we done? | |
| 16:30:56 | Uggla | keerthivasan86[m], are the answer of sean ok for you ? | |
| 16:31:29 | Uggla | any other topic ? | |
| 16:31:56 | masahito | question for the ptg topic selection and timeslot | |
| 16:32:29 | Uggla | masahito, the current topic are in the etherpad above. | |
| 16:32:49 | masahito | thank. ah, yes. I added some. | |
| 16:33:06 | Uggla | I think not all of them are available. I know new ones will come. | |
| 16:33:22 | Uggla | Then we will organize the timeslot to discuss all of them. | |
| 16:33:29 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla: i assume masahito wanted to ask about when there topics will be scheduled | |
| 16:33:39 | sean-k-mooney | or perhaps suggest when tehy are aviable | |
| 16:33:51 | masahito | my question is the ptg time slot is limited so i don't think the ptg can't cover all topics. so i want to know when and how it's decided. | |
| 16:34:13 | sean-k-mooney | masahito: we dont have many topics currently | |
| 16:34:20 | masahito | s/ptg can't/ptg can/ | |
| 16:34:22 | sean-k-mooney | i woudl be surrprised if we didnt cover them all | |
| 16:34:52 | Uggla | I think for the time slot it will be almost ok next week. | |
| 16:35:04 | keerthivasan86[m] | yes Uggla As sean-k-mooney suggested specless blueprint or fresh blueprint to implement tx_queue_size | |
| 16:35:27 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/placement master: improve test logging and replace psycopg2 with psycopg2-binary https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/945487 | |
| 16:35:35 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: ^ | |
| 16:35:50 | keerthivasan86[m] | can i create fresh blueprint to implement tx_queue_size for vhost-net feature ? | |
| 16:35:55 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: ack | |
| 16:36:00 | Uggla | Masahito, we’ll try to accommodate your schedule so you can join. | |
| 16:36:13 | masahito | i got it for the next week meeting. | |
| 16:36:54 | Uggla | any other topic ? | |
| 16:36:55 | masahito | thanks. I prefer 14:00UTC or later slot because of family reason as it's remote session :) | |
| 16:37:28 | Uggla | masahito, sure I'll keep that in mind. | |
| 16:38:31 | Uggla | looks we can close the meeting | |
| 16:39:22 | Uggla | thanks all | |
| 16:39:27 | opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2025/nova.2025-03-25-16.00.log.html | |
| 16:39:27 | opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2025/nova.2025-03-25-16.00.txt | |
| 16:39:27 | opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2025/nova.2025-03-25-16.00.html | |
| 16:39:27 | opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Mar 25 16:39:27 2025 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | |
| 16:39:27 | Uggla | #endmeeting | |
| 16:39:41 | elodilles | thanks Uggla o/ | |
| 16:39:48 | masahito | thank you o/ | |
| 16:39:50 | Uggla | elodilles, ty | |
| 16:42:10 | bauzas | Uggla: bravo for your first meeting :) | |
| 16:44:28 | Uggla | bauzas, ty | |
| 16:46:23 | gibi | Uggla: thanks | |
| 17:33:24 | simondodsley | elodilles: not sure if you saw the conversation yesterday, but are the stable cores open to backport these 3 XS patches to resolve the SCSI page 83 passthrough issue: https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22lun-device-serial%22 | |
| 18:10:10 | gboutry | Hello, I'm currently splitting my hair around https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nova/+bug/2103413 | |
| 18:10:13 | gboutry | I'm currently running nova 31.0.0RC1 tag on python3.13, and I can't create a new instance. | |
| 18:10:17 | gboutry | When I'm trying to, I'm getting the error described in the ticket. | |
| 18:10:22 | gboutry | At around nova/nova/network/neutron.py:1233 (allocate_for_instance), admin_client.httpclient.dict seems to get totally wiped | |
| 18:10:26 | gboutry | going from {'session': <keystoneauth1.session.Session object at 0x7e1a2c601950>,... 'endpoint_override': None, ...} to {} (empty dict) | |
| 18:10:31 | gboutry | Thus failing with the error in the lp bug. the line number it happens varies but always in the function, so this looks like a finalizer going off the rails? | |
| 18:10:35 | gboutry | This seems python 3.13 related, but I'm not sure | |
| 18:11:30 | gboutry | I would appreciate any advice :) | |
| 18:13:16 | sean-k-mooney | gboutry: 3.13 is not offically supproted yet | |
| 18:13:24 | sean-k-mooney | it might work but its not actully tested | |
| 18:13:50 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/runtimes/2025.1.rst is the supproted python verisons | |
| 18:14:26 | sean-k-mooney | gboutry: initall testing for 3.13 will be part of 2025.2 and it will only become requried in 2026.1 | |
| 18:16:22 | gboutry | sean-k-mooney: thanks for the info, Epoxy is targeted to be released in Ubuntu Plucky (25.04) which is using Python 3.13, we'll most likely need to carry a patch downstream if I can find the root cause of this issue | |
| 18:16:32 | sean-k-mooney | gboutry: i wonder if this could be eventlet related. teh error is coming form keystone authg via neutron client | |
| 18:17:26 | gboutry | I am getting some eventlet assertion errors in the background: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/WhKxDrvQHt/ | |
| 18:18:30 | gboutry | https://github.com/eventlet/eventlet/commit/4d48d10b990910cc87ec6bbeeaea63b295fe314d python 3.13 has been added in this commit | |
| 18:18:37 | gboutry | I'll continue poking in this direction, thanks | |
| 18:19:11 | sean-k-mooney | so that after fork thing has come up before | |
| 18:19:27 | sean-k-mooney | we had to workaround a behvior change i think in 3.11 or 3.12 | |
| 18:19:41 | sean-k-mooney | to make sure we got the right id | |
| 18:19:49 | sean-k-mooney | perhasp that broken on 3.13 again | |
| 18:22:10 | sean-k-mooney | gboutry: https://github.com/eventlet/eventlet/issues/592 | |
| 18:22:51 | sean-k-mooney | we remvoed that workaroudn in epoxy https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/cd980cdd1ea957a9aa2220014046ea53079a623f | |
| 18:23:02 | sean-k-mooney | because it has been fixed for a long time in eventlet | |
| 18:23:53 | sean-k-mooney | gboutry: you could try reverting that again locally and see if it fixes that issue on 3.13 but its really a eventlet bug and a regression fo something they previosly fixed | |
| 18:24:20 | gboutry | Thanks for the insight! I'll comeback later (need to take care of something), after reverting that, I'll report back! | |
| 18:24:20 | sean-k-mooney | hum well not quite | |
| 18:24:30 | sean-k-mooney | its a slightly diffent error | |
| 18:24:39 | sean-k-mooney | btu realted to the same code | |
| 18:24:57 | sean-k-mooney | cool | |
| 18:25:04 | gboutry | yes, this happens in the new code specific for python 3.13 support haha | |
| 18:30:23 | sean-k-mooney | gboutry: if you figure it out let us know. we will be trying to enable 3.13 this cycle and dont have issue with backproting non invaisive change to supprot it in 2025.1 but it wont officlaly be supproted for a while | |
| 19:01:27 | mikal | sean-k-mooney: sorry I missed the meeting, I was asleep. I am not entirely sure I know what a "specless blueprint" is. Is that just a blueprint in launchpad? There is already one for the SPICE work, are you saying I need a second one for the extra specs stuff? | |
| 19:02:35 | sean-k-mooney | mikal: a specless blueprint is just a launchpad blueprint that we agree does not require a spec so we approch based on the description of the bluepint in the irc meeting | |
| 19:02:52 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. if we belive it not contoverioal enough of big enough to need a spec | |