Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2025-05-07
15:40:11 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: allow service to start with threading https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948311
19:58:22 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Move ComputeManager to use spawn_on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948186
19:58:22 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Add spawn_on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948079
19:58:23 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Make nova.utils.pass_context private https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948188
19:58:23 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Move ConductorManager to use spawn_on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948187
19:58:24 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Make the default executor configurable https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948087
19:58:24 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Rename DEFAULT_GREEN_POOL to DEFAULT_EXECUTOR https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948086
19:58:25 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: allow service to start with threading https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948311
19:58:25 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Print ThreadPool statistics https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948340
19:58:26 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: DNM:Run nova-next with n-sch in threading mode https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948450
#openstack-nova - 2025-05-08
02:28:56 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add reminder about Tempest API response schemas https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/949113
02:30:24 melwitt Uggla, gmaan: this is a spec template update to add a note about API response schemas in Tempest ^
02:30:43 melwitt (fyi)
10:02:04 opendevreview Ishan Shanware proposed openstack/nova master: [FEAT]: using quota_details to optimize validate networks [FIX]: added error handling for .get() statements [FIX]: pep8 formatting fixed for changes [FIX]: added additional unit tests changes to mock validate_networks https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/945204
10:04:01 ishanwar[m] opendevreview: sean-k-mooney: made a few changes as your requests UTs seems to be working fine now kindly have a look
11:20:13 sean-k-mooney gmaan: question for you https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/user/flavors.html
11:20:39 sean-k-mooney we currently default group_policy to non if request groups come form neutron ports
11:21:06 sean-k-mooney but we require group_policy to be passed if you pass multiple groups in the flavor
11:21:36 sean-k-mooney it almost never makes sesne to use isolate because it will break port based request if you ever want more then one port form the same nic
11:21:43 sean-k-mooney i.e. 2 ovs prot or 2 sriov ports
11:21:52 sean-k-mooney so we never recommend using that in general
11:22:14 sean-k-mooney so my question is if we jsut want to extend the defaulting to None to the falvor
11:22:50 sean-k-mooney can tha tbe done without a microverison. i think the answer is know althoguh im hopeing i can argure that we coudl because we are relaxing the constraint
11:29:00 sean-k-mooney its a trivial spec to write if we decied we need a microversion for tha that but honestly i thinik havign server create fail if a user uses the old microvtion with a flavor and pass with the new versiuon and exactly the same flavor is terrible ux
11:29:46 sean-k-mooney we have previouysly said that new extra specs dont need a microvetion and that changing the default shoudl not either
11:30:16 sean-k-mooney so i think we can do this withou one simiarl to the fix for neutron prots https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/ad4f79836264ec79068f087008367e2d2ae8cbea
11:31:12 sean-k-mooney gibi: ^ you wrote that for the neutron port qos policy i belive do you see any reaons not to extend the defauling to none ot flavor based groups too.
11:34:13 ishanwar[m] <ishanwar[m]> "sean-k-mooney: made a few..." <- Build has passed as well. I think it looks good now
11:37:08 sean-k-mooney ishanwar[m]: i ment to push my comment a while ago but its going to fail our code style checks
11:37:53 sean-k-mooney ishanwar[m]: i got pinged for soemthign else so i didnt finish the review but i pushed my comment about the whitespace sissue
11:37:58 ishanwar[m] sorry new to this
11:37:58 ishanwar[m] sean-k-mooney: pep checks seem to have passed though
11:38:01 sean-k-mooney i think i agree that this is good to go
11:38:31 sean-k-mooney you shoudl stil fix https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/945204/6/nova/tests/unit/network/test_neutron.py#4101
11:38:49 sean-k-mooney but i think the logic is correct
11:39:31 ishanwar[m] i'll ping back
11:39:31 ishanwar[m] let me fix the style
11:39:31 ishanwar[m] sean-k-mooney: yeah I have double checked
11:40:53 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: wsgi: Don't create, use lock in same line https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/949161
11:45:00 sean-k-mooney ishanwar[m]: so running ti locally it fails both the trim trailign spaces check adn the lighleght check when i run tox -e pep8
11:45:33 sean-k-mooney ishanwar[m]: but it also fixes if for you
11:46:14 sean-k-mooney well it fixes the white space you will need to manually fix the linelenght issue
11:53:29 gibi sean-k-mooney: I think if the groups are coming from the flavor then we can simply ask the flavor creator to add policy according to the needs. I.e. if they want two vgpus from two different pgpus and they won't use qos ports then it is a case when isolate policy is needed. For the neutorn port case we need a defaulting as the person creating the port might not be the same as the one creating the
11:53:35 gibi flavor and we dont support adding policy to the port
11:57:23 sean-k-mooney gibi: yes im aware
11:57:30 sean-k-mooney we currently require you to set it
11:57:43 sean-k-mooney but i think it woudl be a better ux if we jsut defautl to none
11:58:01 sean-k-mooney partly because i honestly think we shoudl delete the suprpot for group_polcy in the flavor in its currnt form
11:58:23 sean-k-mooney i know its possibel to use isloate i fyou know exactly how the flavor will be used
11:59:07 sean-k-mooney i.e. if you have a flavor for a specific aplication that that will only be used with prots that either dont hav eresouce request or wont be fullfield form the same rp
11:59:45 sean-k-mooney but i think adding it to the flavor in its current form was a mistake so if we can avoid admin ever settign it by defaulting to None
11:59:53 sean-k-mooney it hink that will server better longterm
12:00:31 sean-k-mooney gibi: there is a similar but diffent issue with it too in that it breakes our filter because it not namespaced
12:00:49 sean-k-mooney stephen and i fixed that in train for the only other extra spec that did not have a namespace
12:01:23 sean-k-mooney we created a namespaced version as an alias and maded the non name "deprecated"
12:01:58 sean-k-mooney i think we shoudl do the same here and add group:policy=isolate|none
12:02:32 sean-k-mooney but again that for a slightly diffent reasons
12:03:23 sean-k-mooney until we can supprot expressign the policy betwen sepcific groups to me isolate is not practiclly usable unless you a nova/placment core or have spent a very very long time lookign at all the details
12:04:00 sean-k-mooney so im wondering if we can take some fo the sharp edges off in a backwards compatible way
12:04:34 sean-k-mooney by 1 defaulting to none in all cases if not set, and 2 providing the namespaced version to fix the filters
12:53:26 gibi I won't block the defaulting patch.
12:53:39 gibi I'm OK to fix the namespaceing
12:54:27 gibi I have no capacity to dig deeper in the discussion, but I'm happy to review the namespacing fix
13:17:54 sean-k-mooney gibi: thanks. i just want to get some early feedback on direction. i will try and find time to file the relevent bug tracker and work on some kind of poc of this for wider dicussion
14:27:38 gibi thanks
14:50:38 gibi dansmith: sean-k-mooney: FYI: here are the pre-fork executor cleanup change https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/947966/9/nova/cmd/scheduler.py it is cleaner in my eyes. It works well in my local non testing and on the gate (CI result is in the nova-next job of the last patch in the series)
14:51:10 dansmith nice
14:52:15 gibi oslo also did some changes based on our feedback about the fork issue but I haven't been able to check it out yet.
15:00:57 gmaan melwitt: thanks. ++
15:09:13 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Add reminder about Tempest API response schemas https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/949113
15:20:19 sean-k-mooney gibi: how woudl you feall about getign rid of the glbal and doign this instead https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/947966/comment/dd7fc7e3_f4e926fb/
15:20:49 sean-k-mooney gibi: and yes teh reset looks cleaner then i was expecting too so +1 on that
15:23:46 sean-k-mooney gibi: by the way we likely should modify our base testcase to ensure we shutdown teh threadpool and reset it between test runs
15:24:28 sean-k-mooney i belive i had that in my verison ot prevent leakign thread betwen tests
15:24:39 sean-k-mooney if we ever do leak a thread in the pool it should fail the test
15:24:55 sean-k-mooney the same way our greenthread leak proctection works
15:26:14 sean-k-mooney in the test we can kind of get awar with it by using the synconousthreadpool via a fixture too
15:27:34 sean-k-mooney but we do have fixture to mange this currently https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/test.py#L197 https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/test.py#L324-L329
15:27:55 sean-k-mooney so we likely need to extend this to the new scather gather pool
15:29:19 sean-k-mooney i made the SynchronousThreadPoolExecutorFixture also apply to the futurist.ThreadPoolExecutor https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/922497/5/nova/tests/fixtures/nova.py#1254
15:33:10 sean-k-mooney gibi: bug i think you shoudl also update https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/fixtures/nova.py#L1191-L1247 and https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/fixtures/nova.py#L2056 or add new ones for this thread pool
16:59:55 gmaan sean-k-mooney: RE on group_policy, I think namespace is good idea, not sure why it was left in initial effort.
17:01:05 gmaan sean-k-mooney: about changing default to None. is not it None as default in ResourceRequest object and as you mentioned it is set 'None' explicitly if two group from different than flavor source
17:01:47 gmaan I mean just checking what is value if it is not passed and groups from cmg from flavor only
17:02:50 sean-k-mooney gmaan: right i know we set it if we get groups form 2 souces
17:03:06 sean-k-mooney im jsut suggesting updating that logic ot set it if we ever have 2 groups and its not set
17:03:23 sean-k-mooney so if you set it in the flavor that woudl alays overwrite it
17:04:06 gmaan sean-k-mooney: yeah, I agree on that. I am just saying we might be doing the same currently (not in flavor but somewhere in request spec/ResourceRequest )?
17:04:56 sean-k-mooney gmaan: not based on gorkas testing of tryign to use 2 groups to ask for two vgpus
17:05:23 sean-k-mooney but maybe there are some code paths where we will
17:05:47 gmaan humm, and is it set 'isolated' in that case?
17:05:56 sean-k-mooney no its not pass to placement at all
17:06:03 gmaan ohk
17:06:03 sean-k-mooney and then placement raises an error i belive
17:06:23 sean-k-mooney i can ask for some logs or access to there enve where they hit this
17:06:35 sean-k-mooney we likely can create a repoducer
17:07:46 gmaan I think I agree with your proposal. As 'none' means request can be satisfied by different or same providers. if not passed, setting it default to None in flavor make sense. I do not think it change behavior from user perspective.
17:08:24 gmaan we are just adding default here and not actually *changing* the default
17:08:44 sean-k-mooney correct that is what it means
17:09:16 sean-k-mooney gmaan: at least based on what we have documetned here https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/user/flavors.html

Earlier   Later