Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-04-03
15:39:00 artom IIRC it grabs the https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/metadata/base.py#L109 object directly
15:39:03 mriedem lyarwood: red hat probably cares about these fixes on stable https://review.openstack.org/#/q/a41d265a19b7bcb1af8fc179bf864e00023c6cc6,n,z
15:39:04 artom So no cache involved
15:39:06 mriedem artom: i can look too
15:39:12 mriedem i'm just high on cold medicine
15:39:54 bauzas mriedem: dansmith: blushing about https://review.openstack.org/391060
15:40:07 bauzas in case you wanna bite it ^
15:40:19 mriedem did you fix your pep8 issue?
15:41:19 artom mriedem, https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L3245
15:41:24 artom That seems to say I'm right
15:41:39 artom https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L62
15:41:44 artom It's importing base, not handler
15:41:50 openstackgerrit Anusha Unnam proposed openstack/nova master: Add description to policies in servers.py https://review.openstack.org/451966
15:41:50 bauzas mriedem: yup, hence me blushing
15:42:20 bauzas I should write 100 times "I shall not provide a i18n message for a debug log"
15:42:23 mriedem right which calls instance_md.metadata_for_config_drive()
15:43:46 bauzas the right-side of Gerrit makes me chilling when I see 9 concurrent patches conflicting with mine :)
15:43:55 mriedem god i always have a hard time chasing down what the md code does
15:44:26 artom Md is due for some refactoring
15:44:36 artom Proper versionning, to begin with
15:45:04 artom And if we can improve on the reason why folks don't like to deploy it, that'd be cool as well
15:45:24 artom IPv6, not so easy to spoof your way into another instance's md...
15:45:52 mriedem do we dump the guest console when your test fails? that would be interesting to see since i think it dumps the config drive
15:49:48 mriedem oh you're not calling verify_metadata_on_config_drive from the tempest test
15:51:18 artom mriedem, not for attach
15:51:32 artom There was agreement that we're not updating the config drive with the new tags
15:51:38 mriedem oh right,
15:51:42 mriedem yeah because we don't update config drive
15:52:42 artom Continuing with the improved metadata service thought, do we have a virt-agnostic way of shoving something into an instance?
15:53:10 artom Really, the only way to make sure it really is the instance it's claiming to be that is asking for metadata is with some sort of shared secret
15:53:44 artom But how do we let the guest know of that secret?
15:54:08 artom Anyways, maybe I'll propose that for next cycle
15:54:26 mriedem i thought passing secrets was part of the vendordata v2 stuff
15:54:55 artom But that still goes through the metadata API, right?
15:55:01 mriedem i thought that's what rob crittenden's vendordata service did
15:55:38 mriedem the initial request is made when creating the config drive, so not through the md api
15:55:59 artom Hrm... But the config drive is libvirt-only, no?
15:56:07 mriedem which is why there was also an ask at BCN for a way to make the server create fail if the vendordata stuff failed during config drive creation
15:56:13 mriedem no
15:56:21 artom As in, we can't rely on it to supply the guest with a secret that it can then use to query the metadata API
15:56:43 artom For real? So xenapi and hyperv support it?
15:56:46 mriedem yes
15:56:51 mriedem all virt drivers support config drive
15:57:08 artom Yey :)
15:57:09 mriedem https://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/support-matrix.html#guest_setup_configdrive
15:57:41 artom Hrmm, maybe I really will propose metadata API improvement next cycle
15:58:10 artom Or this cycle? What's the likelyhood of a spec making its way in?
15:58:17 artom This late in the spec-review process
15:58:44 mriedem with ~100 open specs already? chances aren't great, unless it's a big win and a simple spec probably.
15:58:48 mriedem have you read through https://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/vendordata.html btw?
15:59:13 mriedem i thought removing bdm device from the API would be easy, turns out i was way wrong on that
16:00:07 artom Wait, remove bdm device?
16:00:22 mriedem specifying the device on create and attach
16:00:26 bauzas jaypipes: humpf, reading thru your comments on the claims spec, do you accept now given our IRC meeting that we could POST allocations not at the same time with GET /rps, ie. after filters running ?
16:00:30 mriedem https://review.openstack.org/#/c/452546/
16:00:43 jaypipes bauzas: yes
16:00:47 mriedem artom: turns out there is an ec2 use case that we've been supporting for years,
16:00:50 mriedem that no one really knew existed
16:00:55 bauzas jaypipes: I know it's not what you want, but I think it's a trade-off so that sooner or later, we could merge both calls
16:00:56 mriedem and now i can't break it
16:01:10 bauzas jaypipes: okay, thanks for the clarification
16:01:11 jaypipes bauzas: yes.
16:01:16 artom mriedem, and actually I think it would break device tagging as well
16:01:26 mriedem artom: why?
16:01:38 artom mriedem, https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L7696
16:01:50 artom We use device name to match the XML to the bdm
16:01:57 oomichi alex_xu: can you take a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/452284 ?
16:02:03 bauzas jaypipes: and sorry, I thought you were in favor of a "ticket" (let's call it UUID), at least that's what I remember from some very old midcycle
16:02:13 artom (I'm right in saying that it's the device name the user passed in, right?)
16:02:13 mriedem artom: the libvirt driver completely ignores any user-supplied device name, and calculates it's own
16:02:46 jaypipes bauzas: no, I think the APIs we have will work fine as-is for the moment.
16:03:18 bauzas jaypipes: good with me
16:03:28 mriedem artom: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L7833
16:03:29 artom mriedem, fair enough, I need to refresh myself on how the above link works then :/
16:03:32 mriedem ^ been there since liberty
16:03:59 mriedem artom: i think this code is what sets the device names on the bdm objects https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L7840
16:04:08 artom Ah, so there's still a matching name between the bdm and XML
16:04:16 artom But it's libvirt that sets it, not the user
16:04:19 mriedem correct
16:04:29 mriedem it's all very confusing where libvirt sets it, because the libvirt driver doesn't actually set it
16:04:33 mriedem block_device.default_device_names does
16:04:49 mriedem like most of the bdm code, it's a lot of smoke and mirrors
16:05:14 artom Any sentence that matches /.*block.*device.*confusing.*/ is a tautology
16:05:37 mriedem nvm i guess it is specific to the libvirt driver https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/blockinfo.py#L466
16:05:54 mriedem it has those driver bdm wrapper objects
16:06:02 mriedem so it can mutate the underlying bdm object, and then update it in the db
16:06:05 mriedem using driver_bdm.save()
16:06:20 mriedem and get_disk_info(virt_type, instance, image_meta, block_device_info) is not read-only :)
16:07:02 artom Well, get_guest_xml() isn't read-only either IIRC, so it's at least internally consistent
16:07:21 mriedem https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/blockinfo.py#L488
16:07:50 mriedem yeah anyway, point is, the libvirt driver sets the device name for the bdm, the user doesn't
16:08:43 mriedem sdague: johnthetubaguy: dansmith: did you read that thread in the ML on removing user-supplied bdm devices from requests in the API? i had no idea people were using our crappy data model for overriding image bdms
16:09:12 markus_z felipemonteiro: Would be cool if you could take a look at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1679223
16:09:12 openstack Launchpad bug 1679223 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "tempest.api.compute.servers.test_server_tags.ServerTagsTestJSON fail on centos7 nodes" [Undecided,New]
16:10:43 dansmith mriedem: I saw it, didn't read it
16:11:00 dansmith mriedem: but yeah, I knew
16:11:01 sdague mriedem: it didn't fully sink in, I'll have to revisit
16:14:21 bauzas mriedem: jaypipes: I have a thought, and I'd love your feedback about claims
16:14:28 openstackgerrit Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Factor out duplicated notification sample data https://review.openstack.org/452818
16:14:28 openstackgerrit Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Factor out duplicated notification sample data (2) https://review.openstack.org/452819

Earlier   Later