Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-11-21
17:40:29 dansmith artom_: I'll let mriedem make the call on what the name should be
17:40:44 artom Ugh, it'll be some obscure 80s rock band
17:41:01 mriedem i agree it's confusing that _GroupAntiAffinityFilter is a policy filter but _GroupAffinityFilter isn't
17:41:01 dansmith fine by me :P
17:41:36 sdague efried: looking
17:41:49 mriedem i mean, we could just call the damn thing RUN_FOR_REBUILD but that doesn't help a ton with the reasoning behind which filters should be run during rebuild or not
17:42:14 dansmith and I expect we need to re-use much of the logic for some other things where we need to check with the scheduler
17:42:40 mriedem example?
17:42:41 dansmith although I guess resize does need to check the resourcey things
17:42:44 dansmith I dunno
17:42:51 dansmith feels far too targeted to just say it's for resize
17:42:52 mriedem i think rebuild is just the odd duck
17:43:12 dansmith well, if that's really the case, then maybe we should just be specific until we have a counterexample
17:43:12 mriedem resize runs through the scheduler because it's going to do a claim on the chosen host
17:43:15 dansmith yeah
17:43:25 mriedem live migration doesn't do a claim
17:43:40 mriedem but live migration does allocate on the dest host
17:43:42 mriedem using the same flavor
17:43:42 sdague efried: so, on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/490057/27/nova/api/openstack/compute/servers.py, while it's fine to pass context around, did you look into just pulling it from thread local storage?
17:44:05 sdague efried: https://github.com/openstack/oslo.context/blob/18aa6ec496e54b2403c2cc65234ef6447021fdee/oslo_context/context.py#L490-L495
17:44:07 efried sdague I didn't.
17:44:38 efried sdague tbh, mordred did the code-side work on that patch. I just did the test, and kept it up to date.
17:44:51 sdague ok, the long pass through of some of these variables gets a little spidery. It's probably fine here, but something to think about in the future
17:45:17 mriedem that's why i worried about something doing context.get_admin_context() and that eventually going through here
17:45:21 mriedem but apparently we don't do that with images
17:45:28 efried sdague Yeah, that would have made things a lot easier. Is that the same thing?
17:49:00 sdague mriedem: yeh, I could see that
17:49:20 sdague it's one of those things where context was written originally to not have to pass it around
17:49:29 sdague but that got forgotten at some point
17:49:38 sdague so, meh
17:50:05 sdague efried: +A on that patch, I'll look at the rest of the conversions on top once I get some lunch
17:50:24 efried sdague Thank you sir.
17:50:44 efried sdague (mriedem) Note that the cinder one might still be busted. But now that this one is going through, I'll get back to looking at that.
17:52:11 mriedem efried: it does remind me that someone had a patch to add some code for nova to auth with a service user to do things with cinder like we do for neutron
17:52:18 mriedem i think in one of the periodic tasks
17:52:34 efried mriedem Yeah, I couldn't remember if that was niraj_singh, but I don't think so.
17:52:59 mriedem efried: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/384799/
17:53:07 efried mriedem Oh, actually I was thinking of someone who was trying to use service auth from *within* cinder.
17:53:29 artom dansmith, mriedem, I think we need to get stephenfin to look at the PCI and NUMA bits when he comes back tomorrow
17:53:50 dansmith okay I'm off tomorrow and mriedem is too I think
17:53:55 mriedem pci is extra specs only
17:54:01 mriedem i asked stephen about that yesterday
17:54:05 mriedem numa is definitely a resource thing
17:54:11 mriedem we do claims on numa limits in the resource tracker
17:54:13 artom mriedem, can an admin change them though?
17:54:50 mriedem an admin could change the pci passthrough settings in flavor extra specs, sure
17:54:58 artom For NUMA the cpu and thread policy can change, I dunno if that can give rise to the situation where the host can no longer accept them
17:55:22 mriedem changing extra specs on an existing flavor would be kind of a bad move i think
17:55:31 mriedem but we allow it
17:55:33 dansmith the flavor embedded in the instance will have the pci stuff then, which means we won't see the changed extra_specs from the top-level flavor in the rebuild
17:56:12 dansmith the cpu and thread policy change in the image meta might be a reason to do the rebuild though,
17:56:18 dansmith so I dunno what to say about that
17:57:54 artom dansmith, oh right, that's true, flavours stay with instances now
17:58:21 artom So anything involving flavor extra specs isn't policy then - ie, no need to check with it on rebuild, it hasn't changed for the actual instance
17:58:22 dansmith well, no
17:58:31 dansmith flavors stay with the instance, flavours are not a thing in nova :P
17:58:51 artom What do you mean not a thing?
17:59:02 artom Oh
17:59:18 dansmith artom: yeah, that's probably a good guideline, although some flavor extra_specs get overridden by image meta in some weird ways I think
18:00:17 artom Ugh.
18:00:27 mriedem NUMATopologyFilter gets values from flavors first, and if not set, checks the image meta
18:00:34 artom Just set everything to policy and wait for the bug reports then >:(
18:00:35 mriedem so flavor extra specs take precedence there
18:00:52 dansmith artom: that's the way it is now, and the bug we're fixing :P
18:00:54 mriedem oh wait nvm that
18:01:49 mriedem re the question about the az filter
18:01:50 mriedem https://review.openstack.org/#/c/446446/
18:02:24 mriedem "Unfortunately, as an operator
18:02:24 mriedem can modify any metadata, it is possible to change the value of the
18:02:24 mriedem availability_zone key for a specific aggregate and accordingly change what the
18:02:24 mriedem user can see when looking at AZs"
18:05:35 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: vgpu: add enabled white list https://review.openstack.org/512580
18:10:07 mriedem we persist the flavor with the request spec yes?
18:10:41 dansmith flavor id you mean?
18:10:46 mriedem the full flavor
18:11:01 mriedem looks like yes
18:11:03 dansmith hrm, I guess we do
18:11:14 mriedem which means, re the TrustedFilter question,
18:11:46 mriedem if the admin changes the flavor extra specs for the trusted filter after you've created an instance, when you rebuild or migrate that instance, the filter is going to work on the original flavor used to create the instance
18:11:48 mriedem not the modified one
18:12:02 mriedem *i think*
18:12:46 artom That's what I understood when dansmith said that flavoUrs stay with the instance, yeah
18:17:16 mriedem my favorite burstlet flavour is tripe
18:17:55 mriedem artom: dansmith: ok, some replies inline https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521186/
18:18:48 mriedem dansmith: btw, i changed _GroupAntiAffinityFilter to False, ran functional tests and nothing failed
18:19:12 dansmith mriedem: it'll be non-deterministic
18:19:20 mriedem gha
18:19:22 mriedem *gah
18:19:25 dansmith because if it selects the other host by chance it'll be happy
18:19:49 dansmith it was oddly repeatable for me.. two tests validating the same thing (for two microversions) one would always pass the other would always fail
18:19:53 dansmith took me a while to figure out why
18:20:13 dansmith I was able to shake it up with different levels of concurrency and running the tests in isolation
18:20:30 mriedem test_rebuild_with_soft_anti_affinity ?
18:20:48 mriedem or test_rebuild_with_anti_affinity
18:20:58 dansmith soft I think
18:21:25 mriedem that one involves a weigher so yeah might be that one
18:21:27 dansmith I can try to repro if it's important
18:21:28 mriedem will run it a few times
18:21:58 openstackgerrit Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Use ksa adapter for cinder client https://review.openstack.org/508345
18:22:13 mriedem i am dangerously close to needing some deterministic lunch

Earlier   Later