| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-01-03 | |||
| 10:37:28 | ralonsoh_ | in a generic way. But there were no specific fields for those parameters (product, vendor, etc) | |
| 10:37:47 | ralonsoh_ | ok, I'll submit this modification next release | |
| 10:38:04 | ralonsoh_ | First, I'll submit again the spec | |
| 10:38:39 | stephenfin | ralonsoh_: I realize it's a good chunk of rework, but it just seems like a bad idea to not do this when we're already doing the work here | |
| 10:38:49 | stephenfin | I could help in the rework, but if I do then I can't review :/ | |
| 10:39:02 | stephenfin | ralonsoh_: So that is your call | |
| 10:39:23 | ralonsoh_ | ok, I'll abandond the patch for now | |
| 10:39:30 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova stable/ocata: Don't persist could-be-stale InstanceGroup fields in RequestSpec https://review.openstack.org/528226 | |
| 10:40:54 | stephenfin | ralonsoh_: I wouldn't, personally. Better to keep it as -W so we can see the reasoning when it's reworked | |
| 10:41:00 | stephenfin | But that's me | |
| 10:41:49 | ralonsoh_ | and then there will be another reason to refactor it again | |
| 10:43:56 | stephenfin | ralonsoh_: That hardly seems fair :( I'm not asking for nit-picky stuff here and I (hope) I've explained the rationale for the change as much as possible (plus offered to help where possible) | |
| 11:33:38 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Modify PciDevice.uuid generation code https://review.openstack.org/530487 | |
| 11:33:38 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Add an online migration for PciDevice.uuid https://review.openstack.org/530905 | |
| 13:02:25 | openstackgerrit | Silvan Kaiser proposed openstack/nova master: Added mount fstype based validation of Quobyte mounts https://review.openstack.org/522245 | |
| 13:22:19 | bhagyashris | ianw_pto: Hi, | |
| 13:23:58 | openstackgerrit | Chen Hanxiao proposed openstack/nova master: manager: more detailed info of unsupported compute driver https://review.openstack.org/530701 | |
| 13:50:59 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: conf: Move additional nova-net options https://review.openstack.org/530923 | |
| 13:50:59 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: conf: Use new-style choice values https://review.openstack.org/530924 | |
| 13:56:20 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Add an online migration for BDM.uuid https://review.openstack.org/525599 | |
| 14:33:15 | jaypipes | stephenfin: so is there something funky going on with zuul? I see a lot of -2V's around a dependent change failing to merge and then rechecks right after... | |
| 14:34:56 | stephenfin | jaypipes: I'd expect to see the -2s if a dependant, +W'd patch failed to merge. Those errors do seem more frequent than they should though | |
| 14:35:45 | jaypipes | well, I've noticed *you* recheck'ing a lot after those -2s (and before any other patches are merged/pushed/rebased for those series) which is why I was asking you what was up :) | |
| 14:36:31 | stephenfin | Aha. Nope, they're dumb rechecks. The failures are all timeouts and unrelated to the patches in question | |
| 14:44:10 | ildikov | mriedem: hi | |
| 14:44:21 | mriedem | hi | |
| 14:44:44 | ildikov | mriedem: just a quick note that stvnoyes is helping out with the tempest tests for multi-attach | |
| 14:45:07 | mriedem | i pushed up the tempest multiattach patch yesterday after a rebase, i basically had to start over | |
| 14:45:14 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/266605/ | |
| 14:45:36 | ildikov | mriedem: yeah, I saw your ping this morning | |
| 14:46:41 | ildikov | mriedem: I pointed Steve to the patch yesterday, I didn't know you're planning to work on it | |
| 14:48:01 | mriedem | it still needs some additional test coverage, and needs to actually pass first | |
| 14:48:53 | ildikov | we can chat about it tomorrow on the meeting | |
| 14:49:05 | ildikov | I will try to catch Steve later today | |
| 14:50:25 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Modify PciDevice.uuid generation code https://review.openstack.org/530487 | |
| 14:50:26 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Add an online migration for PciDevice.uuid https://review.openstack.org/530905 | |
| 15:03:59 | stephenfin | jaypipes: Think this is something you could tackle before the end of the cycle? https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+topic:bp/websocket-proxy-to-host-security | |
| 15:04:39 | jaypipes | stephenfin: definitely not my area of expertise, but I will review just because you asked nicely. | |
| 15:04:48 | stephenfin | sdague had volunteered to take the blow at the PTG, but he's not about much these days. It's been about since...Kilo and would be good to finally close out | |
| 15:04:58 | stephenfin | jaypipes: Excellent. Appreciate it :) | |
| 15:06:44 | openstackgerrit | Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Add test for assignment of uuid to a deleted BDM https://review.openstack.org/530774 | |
| 15:21:13 | mriedem | stephenfin: on that series, there is this devstack change https://review.openstack.org/#/c/396186/ | |
| 15:21:23 | mriedem | stephenfin: is tempest already running a test to exercise any of this code? | |
| 15:21:39 | mriedem | i thought at one point danpb had a devstack-gate or project-config change to one of the jobs to enable this | |
| 15:22:02 | mriedem | this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/396289/ | |
| 15:22:12 | stephenfin | If you're running under libvirt then some of it is exercised | |
| 15:22:53 | stephenfin | You're referring to this job, I imagine? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/396289/ | |
| 15:23:15 | mriedem | i see melwitt moved that to a zuulv3 job definition within nova https://review.openstack.org/#/c/513160/4 | |
| 15:23:33 | mriedem | however, the nova-next job is still in the openstack-zuul-jobs repo | |
| 15:24:09 | stephenfin | The stuff that's tested is the basic negotiation. The VeNCrypt scheme is untested without that job by melwitt | |
| 15:24:38 | mriedem | so, can we put some effort into getting the new stuff tested before landing the series? | |
| 15:24:39 | stephenfin | I had patches up to move that, I thought? | |
| 15:24:52 | mriedem | you had patches up to move like all jobs into the nova repo, or something close, | |
| 15:24:59 | mriedem | and i'd like to avoid doing a giant job migration right now | |
| 15:25:21 | mriedem | because, e.g. pike is blocked on the tempest-full job migration for master | |
| 15:25:53 | mriedem | so maybe we start with moving the nova-next job into the nova repo, | |
| 15:26:03 | mriedem | then tweak it on top with mel's change to flip the new bit in devstack | |
| 15:26:15 | mriedem | the NOVA_CONSOLE_PROXY_COMPUTE_TLS variable | |
| 15:26:33 | mriedem | would have been easier if https://review.openstack.org/#/c/513160/ was on the same topic branch as the rest of the series | |
| 15:27:01 | stephenfin | Hmm, I just moved nova-lvm and nova-wsgi https://review.openstack.org/#/c/514309/ I don't think nova-next was supposed to move... | |
| 15:27:15 | stephenfin | But I need to investigate. Leave me with it | |
| 15:27:49 | stephenfin | Though, even still, the first two patches _can_ go in. They're tested using existing code | |
| 15:28:05 | stephenfin | As seen by the many CI failures I'd to work through, heh | |
| 15:28:53 | mriedem | well, an easier short-term solution is just push a patch on top of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/396186/ which sets the variable to True in devstack | |
| 15:30:00 | mriedem | btw, not sure why we need the nova-wsgi job in master - everything is running wsgi by default since pike | |
| 15:30:19 | mriedem | so that nova-wsgi job is only useful while working up to wsgi support in pike, right? | |
| 15:30:38 | stephenfin | We don't. I kept it in there so we can backport all the way to Pike. It's removed in a follow-up https://review.openstack.org/#/c/527140/ | |
| 15:30:54 | mriedem | but pike also runs wsgi by default in devstack | |
| 15:31:01 | mriedem | so it seems we just don't need it at all | |
| 15:31:08 | stephenfin | Ocata? | |
| 15:31:14 | mriedem | we don't support wsgi mode in ocata | |
| 15:31:19 | stephenfin | Oh, well then | |
| 15:31:30 | mriedem | let me make sure i'm not blowing smoke first | |
| 15:32:18 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/blob/stable/pike/lib/nova#L79 | |
| 15:33:21 | stephenfin | It's in Ocata too though https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/blob/stable/ocata/lib/nova#L69 | |
| 15:33:34 | stephenfin | and set to False | |
| 15:33:42 | mriedem | i think that's for grenade | |
| 15:33:57 | mriedem | well, | |
| 15:34:00 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/commit/d5537c1dc835413f1911ab797e3007d85322eace | |
| 15:34:11 | mriedem | that was added when dims added experimental support for running nova-api under wsgi long ago, | |
| 15:34:23 | mriedem | but we don't support it, and with cellsv2 stuff in ocata, the api literally doesn't work in that omde | |
| 15:34:24 | mriedem | *mode | |
| 15:34:27 | openstackgerrit | Chen Hanxiao proposed openstack/nova master: manager: more detailed info of unsupported compute driver https://review.openstack.org/530701 | |
| 15:34:29 | mriedem | which tripleo found out the hard way | |
| 15:34:43 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/stable/ocata/nova/wsgi/nova-api.py#L15 | |
| 15:34:52 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/e846c32ce3c3aee2cd83dec7561dc14cb3f0ada8 | |
| 15:36:51 | mriedem | stephenfin: commented on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/514309/ | |
| 15:36:56 | mriedem | i think you can just squash those two patches | |
| 15:38:42 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Support aggregate affinity filters/weighers https://review.openstack.org/529135 | |
| 15:39:15 | mriedem | here is that devstack patch to run with the tls stuff https://review.openstack.org/530136 | |
| 15:40:00 | mriedem | err this one i mean https://review.openstack.org/530950 | |
| 15:46:37 | hrw | morning | |
| 15:47:22 | mriedem | seems we shouldn't need to trace on an expired token... http://logs.openstack.org/60/513160/4/check/tempest-dsvm-neutron-nova-next-full/6458405/logs/screen-n-novnc.txt.gz?level=TRACE#_Dec_08_23_14_32_787200 | |
| 15:48:11 | hrw | can someone tell me does https://bugs.linaro.org/attachment.cgi?id=905 have sense? On AArch64 cpu_mode = host-model results in "libvirtError: unsupported configuration: CPU mode 'host-model' for aarch64 kvm domain on aarch64 host is not supported by hypervisor" and instance is not started. | |
| 15:48:43 | hrw | if I set cpu_mode = 'host-passthrough' in [libvirt] section of nova.conf then it works. | |
| 15:49:24 | hrw | but I would prefer to have it as default rather than work around it in every deploy method | |
| 15:50:29 | stephenfin | mriedem: All the above sounds good. I'll squash those patches and and drop that log.exception to...log.debug, I guess | |
| 15:50:55 | mriedem | stephenfin: i don't think that logging is coming from nova | |
| 15:50:59 | mriedem | i think it's coming from websockify | |
| 15:52:29 | stephenfin | I think this is it https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/console/websocketproxy.py#L156-L157 | |