| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-07-19 | |||
| 18:37:25 | sdague | I didn't look at the authorship | |
| 18:37:36 | mriedem | ok, your context switch from server tags to that threw me off | |
| 18:37:47 | mriedem | i killed a spider on my porch | |
| 18:37:51 | mriedem | and it's babies | |
| 18:38:00 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: guh, was on a prior revision. :( | |
| 18:38:02 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: sec | |
| 18:38:08 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: i had asked jangutter to rebase on master so the that commit id would not change and i would not have to update the sha in the commit to the release repo. | |
| 18:38:12 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: no worries | |
| 18:39:15 | mriedem | sean-k-mooney: if it's got new features and stuff it should be a minor version bump | |
| 18:39:51 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: i could bump to 1.7 but the bump to 1.6 was mainly for the hardware offload feature | |
| 18:40:12 | sean-k-mooney | 1.6.1 was just removing some vendor specific assumtions but more or less the same | |
| 18:40:31 | mriedem | sean-k-mooney: there is a new feature in there, and there is a new min bump on some dependencies | |
| 18:40:34 | mriedem | so it's 1.7 | |
| 18:40:35 | mriedem | or bust | |
| 18:40:44 | mriedem | +oslo.config!=4.3.0,!=4.4.0,>=4.0.0 # Apache-2.0 | |
| 18:41:05 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: ill have to respin the patch any when jaypipes or jangutter respins so cool ill make it 1.7.0 | |
| 18:41:29 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: one sec. pushing now. | |
| 18:41:40 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/os-vif master: Improve OVS Representor VF Lookup https://review.openstack.org/485125 | |
| 18:41:45 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: ^ | |
| 18:41:59 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: cool thanks jay | |
| 18:42:53 | jangutter | sean-k-mooney, jaypipes: thanks! | |
| 18:44:05 | jangutter | jaypipes: amazingly, moving those regex comment lines up didn't break anything else. I regard regexes as "write-only-code", so I tend to leave my future self notes as to what they should do. | |
| 18:44:15 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/485304 should now be up to date | |
| 18:45:07 | sean-k-mooney | jangutter: yes regexes to tend to be like perl, write once debug never | |
| 18:49:14 | sean-k-mooney | moshele seams to be offline and the new melonox ci dose not seam to be commenting back on this patchset. | |
| 18:50:08 | sean-k-mooney | do we want to leave moshele have the final approval/wait for the ci to comment on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/485125 | |
| 18:50:50 | mriedem | melwitt: some nits in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/446243/ | |
| 18:51:26 | melwitt | mriedem: cool, thanks | |
| 18:52:41 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: approved it. not a high risk thing. | |
| 18:53:24 | jangutter | sean-k-mooney: if it fails on the Mellanox CI, then there's a missing test case... | |
| 18:55:04 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: cool well hopefully we can do the release and bump the upper constriants and global requirement tomorrow once https://review.openstack.org/#/c/485304 is merged. | |
| 18:55:51 | sean-k-mooney | im going to log off for the night so ill chat to ye tomorrow | |
| 18:58:58 | jangutter | ditto, thanks very much! | |
| 18:59:11 | mriedem | i'll take care of that today | |
| 18:59:59 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: the requirement or was that in responce to something else | |
| 19:01:14 | mriedem | to your stuff | |
| 19:01:21 | mriedem | i will make all your dreams come true | |
| 19:01:50 | mriedem | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps7tVvQHLyo | |
| 19:03:20 | mriedem | TheJulia: so for the bfv change, is there a passing ci for it in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472740/ ? | |
| 19:03:51 | mriedem | oh i see, | |
| 19:04:03 | mriedem | answer is 'no' because the project-config changes for the experimental queue job aren't landed | |
| 19:04:18 | jaypipes | cfriesen: yet another reason the resize workflow (and its manual confirm/revert step) is antithetical to cloudy automation :( | |
| 19:05:17 | mriedem | cfriesen: you guys have some people doing perf testing against master? | |
| 19:05:27 | mriedem | like at least rally testing? | |
| 19:06:58 | mriedem | jlvillal: left a suggestion in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/470307/ | |
| 19:07:10 | mriedem | jlvillal: there are ways to test things using devstack-gate before they land as a job in project-config | |
| 19:07:57 | jlvillal | mriedem, Thanks. Yeah I know about the hack devstack-gate thing :) | |
| 19:08:21 | jlvillal | mriedem, We actually have a different patch which I think is ready to merge | |
| 19:08:25 | TheJulia | mriedem: your own investigation beat me to answering | |
| 19:08:27 | mriedem | btw, what's the difference between https://review.openstack.org/#/c/480332/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/470307/ ? | |
| 19:08:37 | mriedem | jlvillal: that's what i was wondering | |
| 19:08:42 | jlvillal | mriedem, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/480332/ | |
| 19:08:42 | mriedem | can the merge conflict one be dropped | |
| 19:08:55 | jlvillal | mriedem, I think so. I'll leave a comment | |
| 19:09:14 | mriedem | cool, because i'd like to see this series actually pass ci somewhere before we approve it in nova | |
| 19:09:50 | TheJulia | mriedem: derekh was working on it and then had to disappear for a week or two so hshiina picked it up and made a new patch | |
| 19:09:59 | mriedem | ok | |
| 19:10:11 | TheJulia | 470307 likely just needs to be abandoned at this point | |
| 19:10:19 | TheJulia | since it is just creating confusion | |
| 19:10:52 | mriedem | sdague: can you abandon? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/470307/ | |
| 19:11:39 | sdague | mriedem: done | |
| 19:12:07 | TheJulia | thanks sdague | |
| 19:14:39 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Deprecate useless quota_usage_refresh from nova-manage https://review.openstack.org/446243 | |
| 19:14:43 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Make Quotas object favor the API database https://review.openstack.org/410945 | |
| 19:14:47 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add online migration to move quotas to API database https://review.openstack.org/410946 | |
| 19:25:18 | mriedem | melwitt: doc build failed on the man page https://review.openstack.org/#/c/446243/43/doc/source/cli/nova-manage.rst | |
| 19:25:21 | mriedem | you need a blank line in there | |
| 19:25:25 | mriedem | otherwise +2 | |
| 19:25:37 | melwitt | oh, dangit | |
| 19:27:16 | melwitt | forgot about the tox docs target | |
| 19:27:55 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Add functional test for resize-confirm plus quota validation https://review.openstack.org/483559 | |
| 19:28:07 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Add resize down test which also verifies quota changes https://review.openstack.org/484151 | |
| 19:28:13 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: claim resources in placement API during schedule() https://review.openstack.org/483566 | |
| 19:28:13 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: add dict of allocation requests to select_dests() https://review.openstack.org/483565 | |
| 19:28:14 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: Handle None returned from get_allocation_candidates due to connect failure https://review.openstack.org/484988 | |
| 19:28:32 | jlvillal | mriedem, As an FYI, I have asked for reviews on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/480332/ , but I know infra is pretty busy | |
| 19:28:49 | mriedem | ok | |
| 19:29:08 | jaypipes | mriedem, dansmith, bauzas, edleafe: rebased the placement-claims stuff on top of mriedem's Handle None returned from get_allocation... patch and addressed all of your review comments. | |
| 19:30:00 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Fix the inappropriate parameter name https://review.openstack.org/480826 | |
| 19:32:48 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: conf: remove *_topic config opts https://review.openstack.org/433924 | |
| 19:33:09 | melwitt | tox -edocs fails locally with "dot command 'dot' cannot be run (needed for graphviz output), check the graphviz_dot setting" just fyi | |
| 19:33:41 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Deprecate useless quota_usage_refresh from nova-manage https://review.openstack.org/446243 | |
| 19:33:46 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Make Quotas object favor the API database https://review.openstack.org/410945 | |
| 19:33:50 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add online migration to move quotas to API database https://review.openstack.org/410946 | |
| 19:35:19 | melwitt | this is an interesting func test failure, timed out holding a lock during update_available_resource http://logs.openstack.org/01/484501/1/gate/gate-nova-tox-functional-ubuntu-xenial/080e1fb/testr_results.html.gz | |
| 19:35:39 | melwitt | or waiting for lock | |
| 19:39:25 | mriedem | melwitt: that's a known one | |
| 19:39:33 | mriedem | don't have a fingerprint for it since we can't really fingerprint it very well | |
| 19:39:50 | mriedem | we have this though http://status.openstack.org/elastic-recheck/#1704588 | |
| 19:39:54 | mriedem | which is caused by the same thing | |
| 19:39:59 | mriedem | rebuild fails b/c of novalidhost | |
| 19:40:21 | mriedem | not really sure why rebuild should care if it's on the same host though... | |
| 19:40:31 | mriedem | we shouldn't do a claim for rebuild if it's on the same host | |
| 19:41:26 | mriedem | http://logs.openstack.org/82/482382/4/gate/gate-nova-tox-functional-py35-ubuntu-xenial/fdfd05a/console.html#_2017-07-15_12_30_11_220266 | |
| 19:42:11 | melwitt | it seems weird that it's deadlocked trying to update resources | |
| 19:43:44 | mriedem | melwitt: i've wondered if we should remove this v | |
| 19:43:45 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/functional/integrated_helpers.py#L64 | |
| 19:43:53 | mriedem | and start whittling that down into specific tests that require locking | |
| 19:44:07 | mriedem | surely 90% of our functional tests shouldn't require a global lock | |
| 19:46:07 | melwitt | hm, yeah. I guess I haven't really known what REQUIRES_LOCKING does. looking at test.py now | |