Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-02-10
16:48:04 mriedem so rhel would be ok with 1.3.1
16:48:10 mriedem i'm less sure about debian and sles/suse
16:48:54 mriedem maybe i should ask ajaeger
16:49:23 kashyap Yeah, if we can get the data from Debian and SUSE folks, we can settle on 1.3.1 -- as the cross-distro supported version, for upstream
16:49:58 mriedem zigo would know about debian
16:50:43 kashyap Yeah, would be better if they responded on the list, so the record is archived
16:51:22 mriedem i'll follow up with those guys
16:51:48 kashyap Thanks.
16:52:32 mordred debian stable has 1.2.9 - debian testing has 3.0.0
16:52:38 AJaeger hi nova team
16:52:47 cfriesen do we only care about LTS versions of Ubuntu?
16:53:06 mordred cfriesen: yah
16:53:16 AJaeger mriedem: what's up?
16:53:43 kashyap AJaeger: See the mailing list post:
16:53:49 mriedem AJaeger: see -infra now :)
16:53:54 AJaeger ;)
16:54:06 kashyap AJaeger: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-February/111902.html
16:54:06 mordred cfriesen: or, rather, we must care about at least the latest LTS- and we only test the latest LTS in the gate. our policy _technically_ is to target the latest ubuntu unless doing so would make backporting to latest lts unreasonably difficult ... but since in practice we gate on latest LTS ...
16:54:41 johnthetubaguy mriedem: superdan: is there anyone looking at the mod-wsgi service version break thing already? sneti has been working on a related bug when using the eventlet stack
16:55:40 AJaeger mriedem: libvirt 2.0.0 should be new enough, isn't it?
16:55:41 mriedem johnthetubaguy: for pike
16:56:00 superdan johnthetubaguy: I was planning to do it but haven't started yet
16:56:18 superdan johnthetubaguy: figured we probably want to discuss plans at the ptg at least
16:56:19 mriedem AJaeger: 2.0.0 would mean nova in pike wouldn't work with xenial
16:56:21 cfriesen would there be any interest in being able to specify a vif_model as part of the neutron port creation, then have nova use that vif_model when booting/attaching with that port?
16:56:25 johnthetubaguy mriedem: yeah, I was thinking both in terms of the devstack changes and the service reporting
16:56:52 mriedem AJaeger: we're talking 1.2.9 minimum libvirt for nova in pike, and 1.3.1 libvirt minimum for nova in queens
16:57:35 lascii good morning everyone
16:57:54 dims_ hey lascii !
16:58:18 melwitt lascii o/
16:58:34 johnthetubaguy superdan: OK, yeah, yeah certainly ptg fodder
16:58:47 johnthetubaguy lascii: hello hello
17:00:43 AJaeger mriedem: I let our experts answer on the mailing... AFAIK we have libvirt 2.0.0 version currently and thus a minimum requirement of any 1.x should be fine for SUSE
17:01:09 mriedem AJaeger: ok thanks
17:04:36 AJaeger mriedem: thanks for asking!
17:07:07 openstackgerrit Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova-specs master: PowerVM Driver Integration (Pike) https://review.openstack.org/432387
17:09:12 openstackgerrit Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova-specs master: PowerVM Driver Integration (Pike) https://review.openstack.org/432387
17:10:46 efried mriedem FYI ^^ for continuation of https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/powervm-nova-compute-driver
17:15:56 superdan mriedem: why does the 14.0.1 section talk about 14.0.0 things here? http://docs.openstack.org/releasenotes/nova/newton.html
17:16:12 mriedem it's a bug
17:16:22 mriedem oh, no,
17:16:29 mriedem that's because we didn't get the prelude into 14.0.0
17:16:37 mriedem remember bauzas added that after we released newton
17:16:42 mriedem so it got into 14.0.1
17:16:52 superdan oh
17:27:31 ygl hi all
17:37:36 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Remove flavor_* functions from db/api https://review.openstack.org/431752
17:37:37 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Remove main_db flavor compatibility https://review.openstack.org/431722
17:39:27 superdan hmm, where can i see the release notes as rendered like they would for a release for the current tree if it were to happen now?
17:39:33 superdan dhellmann: dims_ mriedem_lunch ^ ?
17:42:21 melwitt superdan: you mean this? http://docs.openstack.org/releasenotes/nova/unreleased.html
17:42:37 superdan melwitt: yeah
17:42:52 superdan melwitt: didn't see it in a docs job run, figured it'd be there but thanks
17:44:19 melwitt oh, yeah I dunno where/if it exists in any per patch runs
17:45:12 superdan this is what I want anyway
17:45:13 superdan so thanks
17:58:42 dims_ superdan : y was lunching :) back now
18:15:13 openstackgerrit Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: placement: adds REST API for nested providers https://review.openstack.org/384807
18:15:14 openstackgerrit Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: placement: allow filter providers in tree https://review.openstack.org/377215
18:15:16 openstackgerrit Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: pci: add uuid field to PciDevice object https://review.openstack.org/414768
18:15:16 openstackgerrit Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: placement: integrate ProviderTree to report client https://review.openstack.org/415921
18:15:17 openstackgerrit Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: placement: SRIOV PF devices as child providers https://review.openstack.org/414769
18:15:18 openstackgerrit Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: placement: adds ProviderTree for nested resources https://review.openstack.org/415920
18:15:18 openstackgerrit Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: placement: update client to set parent provider https://review.openstack.org/385693
18:15:19 openstackgerrit Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: placement: add nested resource providers https://review.openstack.org/377138
18:19:44 leakypipes mriedem_lunch, johnthetubaguy, superdan: I think https://review.openstack.org/#/c/404472/ is ready for your eyeballs again now.
18:24:10 superdan leakypipes: I don't think I've reviewed that yet at all, but
18:24:25 superdan leakypipes: does that not seem like a major layering violation? maybe that has already been discussed?
18:25:31 leakypipes superdan: sorry, I'm not quite following you. do you mean that that code is in the wrong place?
18:27:02 superdan leakypipes: the resource tracker having things like "if ironic, do this other thing"
18:27:17 superdan we try not to even do that in compute manager, which directly consumes the compute drivers
18:27:34 superdan and we nak people having tried to do stuff like that in the past
18:28:26 leakypipes superdan: yeah, it's a temporary thing until we can be sure that the request from the user just contains a list of resources to consume as opposed to the existing situation where we need to tell if the instance is a baremetal instance or not and then do something different to track Ironic resources.
18:28:48 leakypipes superdan: the dilemma we have is a chicken and egg one.
18:29:23 superdan I'm not sure what that means, request wise, but I assume that means temporary ... for a while?
18:30:11 mriedem i had made a comment at one point about subclasses the resource tracker for ironic specific resource class massaging
18:30:21 mriedem since there were big conditionals in that patch at one point which were all just for ironic
18:30:23 leakypipes superdan: an OpenStack admin may have set the node.resource_class attribute for some or all of their Ironic baremetal nodes, but a) there may be records in Nova already existing that refer to the consumed resources like VCPU, MEMORY_MB and DISK_GB. We need to continue to track those "resources" like we do now but also track the new node.resource_class consumption. All of that code is basically the "auto-heal" code for Ironic installations in
18:30:24 leakypipes Newton and Ocatra
18:31:26 mriedem fwiw ironic + resource providers is broken in newton anyway i think
18:31:40 leakypipes superdan: yes, that code and those conditionals will not be necessary once the "flavor" for Ironic nodes no longer requests VCPU, MEMORY_MB and the like and instead just requests the custom resource class like "CUSTOM_IRON_SILVER" or whatnot.
18:31:51 mriedem w/o https://review.openstack.org/#/c/416762/ anyway
18:32:20 leakypipes mriedem: ah, yes, but that's a bit of a different thing, right?
18:32:27 superdan mriedem: yeah, I'd like that to be less hacky.. I'd have to think about the best way to do it though
18:32:28 mriedem yeah
18:32:38 ygl can we access the ovs controller of devstack ?
18:33:21 ygl is it a opendaylight controller ?
18:37:58 superdan jroll: is ironic making "set your node class" a requirement for people deploying ocata?
18:38:23 superdan meaning, is there a "you will break in pike if you haven't set this property" warning?
18:38:29 jroll superdan: not yet no
18:38:48 jroll we also support ironic without nova so we can never make it strictly mandatory
18:38:52 superdan jroll: so we have to tolerate not having this set until queens?
18:38:57 jroll or rather, doing that would be painful for people that don't care
18:39:23 jroll nah, we should be able to enforce it nova side in pike
18:39:32 jroll we can make it a pre-pike upgrade requirement
18:39:57 superdan jroll: okay presumably you have to note your pre-pike requirements in ocata, no?
18:40:06 superdan or are you just going to say in pike release notes you're broken if you don't?
18:40:19 jroll superdan: was planning on pike relnotes + upgrade docs
18:40:25 superdan okay
18:40:32 superdan so since we're in pike now,

Earlier   Later