Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2026-06-11
08:26:54 sean-k-mooney[m] no worrise im glad some one has had time to actully look at fixing it
08:27:22 sean-k-mooney[m] i treid to explain in the bug that i did carea bout fixing it but just didnt have the time to do it
08:27:28 sean-k-mooney[m] so im happy to review
08:28:21 sean-k-mooney[m] ill also admit i forgot this was still a bug
08:45:26 opendevreview Ashish Gupta proposed openstack/nova master: [DNM][Experimental] tests: Use per-database write locks instead of global lock https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/992862
09:25:27 cw0306-lee[m] Could you please check it?
09:25:27 cw0306-lee[m] Hi, gibi! I added comment on review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/991636
09:25:59 opendevreview Kamil Sambor proposed openstack/nova master: Restore 'fork' start method for daemon mode on Python 3.14 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/987815
09:25:59 opendevreview Kamil Sambor proposed openstack/nova master: Change nova-alt-configurations job https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/983179
09:26:00 opendevreview Kamil Sambor proposed openstack/nova master: [dnm] testing python 3.14 with restored fork https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/987821
09:26:15 cw0306-lee[m] @_oftc_gibi:matrix.org! I added comment on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/991636 Could you please check it?
09:26:15 cw0306-lee[m] * Hi,
09:41:48 sean-k-mooney how do we feel about https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/471815, we are at spec freeze today and i would really like to finally see that adance
09:42:17 sean-k-mooney the implemtion might need some addtional docs and or test but it exists https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/941227
09:43:02 sean-k-mooney so to me this is small and worth doing
10:00:32 seyeongkim sean-k-mooney: Hi. I've addressed your comments on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963665 and also updated the LP bug with more details on the use case — when you have a moment, could you take another look and let me know if anything else is needed? Thanks!
10:05:15 sean-k-mooney seyeongkim: sure but again this is really a feature nto a bug
10:06:25 sean-k-mooney we have never offcially supproted the usecase your trying to enable
10:10:53 opendevreview Seyeong Kim proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Support boot_index for multiple block devices https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963665
10:16:28 opendevreview Joan Gilabert proposed openstack/nova master: Add mtty support to nova-next https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/922140
10:24:47 opendevreview Konrad Gube proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Propose assisted-volume-extend API https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/949504
10:26:44 seyeongkim sean-k-mooney: Thanks Sean, and fair point on it being closer to a feature. Could I ask you to take one more detailed look though? My thinking is mostly from the user's side: once someone sets boot_index on a volume, it feels reasonable to expect that device to at least show up to the grub, rather than being silently skipped. Right now Nova accepts the boot_index but the extra disks never get a per-device boot order, so SeaBIOS skips them entire
10:28:03 sean-k-mooney i jsut did i have not -2'd it but i dont think this is approate to treat as a bug
10:28:36 sean-k-mooney seyeongkim: if you removed all the logic related to attch/detach
10:28:53 sean-k-mooney it might eb accpable to set the index staticly via server create
10:29:14 sean-k-mooney that is the only thing the api ahs ever allowed
10:29:28 sean-k-mooney but it was documetned as driver spcric
10:29:38 sean-k-mooney and im not sure this was ever supproted in the libvirt driver
10:29:56 sean-k-mooney i think that was only ever properly suprpoted in xen or one of the other drivers
10:33:49 sean-k-mooney ah found it it was implemt by the hyperv driver
10:34:24 sean-k-mooney https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/d68c04299aa2c04aea16e881d93076236cc64d7b
10:38:43 sean-k-mooney seyeongkim: so this wa never supprot by libvirt, vmware, xen or powervm
10:41:42 seyeongkim sean-k-mooney: Thanks for the review. Our customer relies on a multiple-disk boot scenario that worked before this SeaBIOS change (https://github.com/coreboot/seabios/commit/2f4d068645c211e309812372cd0ac58c9024e93b), and I haven't been able to find a workaround yet(it turned out SATA is not viable workaround although I mentioned it in review comment). Since libvirt provide options that per-disk boot order in the XML, I thought this Nova patch co
10:46:54 sean-k-mooney sure but nova does nto provide the libvirt api
10:47:30 seyeongkim right thank you so much!
10:47:37 sean-k-mooney you cant assume that jsut ebcause libvirt supprot soemthign that nova supprot it even if it worked by acindent before
10:48:09 seyeongkim agreed
10:52:40 cw0306-lee[m] sean-k-mooney @_oftc_sean-k-mooney:matrix.org: Thank you for comment. I replied to it.
13:39:40 opendevreview Joan Gilabert proposed openstack/nova master: Add mtty support to nova-next https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/922140
14:03:50 opendevreview Masanori Ueno proposed openstack/nova master: live-migration: Ensure limits are set before _call_livem_checks_on_host https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/990212
14:13:07 opendevreview Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Doc changes for unpin-az https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/992469
14:13:07 opendevreview Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add unpin AZ functionality https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/990682
15:34:34 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2026.1: DNM trigger whitebox https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/992965
15:36:35 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2025.2: DNM trigger whitebox https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/992966
15:38:59 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2025.1: DNM trigger whitebox https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/992967
15:39:38 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add conf option for live migration monitor interval https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/937223
18:41:52 melwitt gmaan: not urgent but would love to get your brain waves on my question on API samples updates for new microversion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/990682/comment/9a2359f1_59d3600d/ I thought since this change is added a new req param for PUT /servers/{server_id} we would only need new samples for that API ... no other schema is changing. so do we really need to push a bunch more API samples for seemingly no reason?
18:51:09 gmaan melwitt: checking
19:06:10 dansmith melwitt: if not, presumably we could remove them from the last two microversions' sample tests and gmaan's own "fix" commit wasn't needed?
19:08:06 gmaan dansmith: melwitt commented, you do not need to have all of them if you just run the update server tests.
19:08:29 dansmith gmaan: so why are they there for like 2.98 which also didn't change rebuild?
19:09:15 gmaan dansmith: they did, response of GET server, update, and rebuild is changed all together
19:09:48 melwitt yeah. happens often with responses bc so many response schema are shared among APIs
19:09:54 gmaan dansmith: api sample tests expect all the APi sample file in same microversion dir if tests are running for that microversion even API is changed or not
19:10:10 gmaan yeah, they are shared from view builder
19:10:14 melwitt req schema should be minimal blast radius
19:10:17 dansmith okay so wait
19:10:41 dansmith "expect all the APi sample file in same microversion dir if tests are running for that microversion even API is changed or not" is what I figured, which is that I didn't change server response but still need the sample
19:10:48 gmaan in unpin az, we should only need req and resp file of PUT server only
19:11:25 gmaan dansmith: because you are running test as part of ServersSampleJson2104Test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/990682/3/nova/tests/functional/api_sample_tests/test_servers.py#749
19:11:42 gmaan i mean tests for post, get servers
19:11:43 dansmith ohh, ok I see
19:11:52 dansmith I was going to say.. doesn't work without, but I see your point
19:11:59 dansmith if I change the base
19:12:39 gmaan yeah, we do not need to run any other test than update sevrer in this microversion
19:21:28 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova stable/2025.1: Fix resize to unpermitted flavors https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/988154
22:26:56 melwitt looks like I have another flaky test test_refresh_nfs_swap_cache_stale 😩
22:45:07 dansmith gmaan: yeah I was just missing that inheriting from that test class is what was making it require them all for me and I figured that since the last few also had all the samples that I needed them
22:45:09 dansmith but makes sense not
22:45:11 dansmith *now
23:01:55 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Fix intermittent test_refresh_nfs_swap_cache_stale failure https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/993059
23:05:04 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Fix intermittent test_refresh_nfs_swap_cache_stale failure https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/993059
23:19:06 melwitt gmaan: ^ another flaky test shame fix above
23:45:50 melwitt huh I noticed nova-graceful-shutdown job is running on that unit test only change, perhaps needs some irrelevant-files in .zuul.yaml?
23:48:20 gmaan melwitt: lgtm, +2
23:48:27 melwitt thanks gmaan
23:48:46 gmaan melwitt: oh is it? i thought i used the same irrelevant file there like other jobs
23:49:20 melwitt it inherits from devstack-multinode that might be why it doesn't have
23:50:05 gmaan oh, yeah, no irrelevant file in nova side https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/.zuul.yaml#L967
23:50:34 melwitt that aside, the job is running pretty fast so
23:50:46 melwitt is beating openstack-tox-cover lol
23:50:57 melwitt *it's
#openstack-nova - 2026-06-12
00:45:08 opendevreview Ghanshyam Maan proposed openstack/nova master: Add irrelevant-files for the graceful shutdown jobs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/993063
00:50:31 opendevreview Ghanshyam Maan proposed openstack/nova master: Add irrelevant-files for the graceful shutdown jobs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/993063
00:57:58 gmaan melwitt: ^^
03:23:11 opendevreview Brian Haley proposed openstack/nova master: Change neutron API calls to use project_id https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/991948
04:24:28 gmaan not sure why tox cover job takes more than hr to finish
05:17:38 opendevreview Shalini Srivastava proposed openstack/nova stable/2025.2: Filter invalid kwargs in volume_api.create to prevent TypeError https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/992849
08:02:22 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add conf option for live migration monitor interval https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/937223
08:41:53 sean-k-mooney sambork: gibi im correct in thinkign we are still defaulting to eventlet mode for the novnc proxy currently right?
08:42:17 sean-k-mooney i know the plan is to update that to threaded but master today is eventlet ya?
08:42:26 sambork yes
08:42:30 sean-k-mooney cool
08:44:07 sean-k-mooney i have ubuntu 26.04 workign in devstack but the 2 failign test are for the novnc proxy
08:44:09 sean-k-mooney https://e5392d8b5c67a9e24e1f-aa881d493e66ac85e397d3a18f294794.ssl.cf5.rackcdn.com/openstack/a154d2bf5825493cb4ae423d6e989638/testr_results.html
08:44:23 sean-k-mooney and its ths stame test failure i got in eventlet mode with uv on python 3.14
08:44:39 sean-k-mooney so i just need to swap to threaded mode and that will start passing
08:45:45 sambork yeah also there is this patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/987815/6 which should fix this issue based on ci run with 3.14
08:46:35 sean-k-mooney ah the fork one. ya i could add that as a depens on
08:47:11 sean-k-mooney but i think ill just swap to threading mode for now and i can add a followup to drop the override that depends on that

Earlier   Later