| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-01-17 | |||
| 15:18:41 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: +1d FWIW, I leave you chase the release folks | |
| 15:20:01 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: no worries. thanks | |
| 15:22:06 | openstackgerrit | Tetsuro Nakamura proposed openstack/nova master: Fix comments in get_all_with_shared() https://review.openstack.org/533195 | |
| 15:23:41 | gibi | ildikov: I have only question in the multiattach api patch, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/271047/55/nova/compute/api.py@3700 | |
| 15:24:40 | openstackgerrit | Tetsuro Nakamura proposed openstack/nova master: Fix allocation_candidates not to ignore shared RPs https://review.openstack.org/533396 | |
| 15:26:43 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: You might do a follow up patch to 'openstack/requirements' to blacklist os-vif 1.8.0 too | |
| 15:27:29 | ildikov | gibi: hmm, I'm not sure I fully understand the question | |
| 15:27:51 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: oh good point i guess we should wait for the auto generated one for 1.8.1 to be submitted then i can modify it to blacklist 1.8.0 | |
| 15:27:53 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: WIP libvirt: QEMU native LUKS decryption for volumes https://review.openstack.org/523958 | |
| 15:29:28 | gibi | ildikov: so in the _check_attach_and_reserve_volume we differentiate between two cases | |
| 15:29:38 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: i think it will just updat this one https://review.openstack.org/#/c/532987/ but ill wait for it to be submitted. | |
| 15:30:08 | gibi | ildikov: and if this is the case when the user attaches a new volume to a running instance then we don't check the multiattach capabilities | |
| 15:30:11 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: by the way can you take a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/533766/ this is the nova unit test change that is required for os-vif 1.8.x | |
| 15:30:44 | gibi | ildikov: at least based on the code comment I commented on | |
| 15:31:06 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: Stuck in meetings til EOD (Intel flashbacks, heh) but I'll try squeeze it in. If not, I'll tackle it tomorrow (y) | |
| 15:31:07 | ildikov | gibi: we always check this first: if volume['multiattach'] and not supports_multiattach: | |
| 15:31:38 | gibi | ildikov: true, but the compute version is not checked in the if branch | |
| 15:31:39 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: Oh, wait. It's tiny. Done | |
| 15:31:41 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: cool no problem, its pretty trivial | |
| 15:31:55 | sean-k-mooney | ya just missing the datapath field. | |
| 15:32:07 | gibi | ildikov: it is only checked in the else branch | |
| 15:32:49 | ildikov | gibi: ah ok, I see now | |
| 15:33:46 | gibi | ildikov: it could be that we check the compute version is some other point in the call stack for the if case | |
| 15:36:32 | ildikov | gibi: we do fail in reserve_block_device_name here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/531244/9/nova/compute/rpcapi.py | |
| 15:37:48 | tetsuro | bauzas: Hi, if you have time, could you have a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534807/ ? | |
| 15:40:47 | ildikov | gibi: which might not be satisfying enough for that 'if' | |
| 15:41:33 | ildikov | gibi: but that's my guess for now :) | |
| 15:42:18 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: saw https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534807/ ? | |
| 15:42:22 | bauzas | just respin | |
| 15:42:26 | gibi | ildikov: thanks I think I see now. compute.api._attach_volume() calls _create_volume_bdm that will call the rpc | |
| 15:42:40 | bauzas | tetsuro: you pointed me sean-k-mooney's patch, was that intentional ? | |
| 15:42:43 | gibi | ildikov: in case of attaching a volume to an existing instance | |
| 15:43:07 | ildikov | gibi: yep, that flow sounds correct | |
| 15:43:28 | gibi | ildikov: so it fails before _check_attach_and_reserve_volume is called in _attach_volume | |
| 15:43:29 | tetsuro | bauzas: sorry, just a mistake | |
| 15:43:44 | gibi | ildikov: this is why we don't need an extra check in _check_attach_and_reserve_volume for the attach volume case | |
| 15:44:21 | tetsuro | bauzas: could you have a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/531347/ ? | |
| 15:44:52 | bauzas | tetsuro: short patch, will look :) | |
| 15:45:42 | ildikov | gibi: +1 | |
| 15:45:47 | tetsuro | bauzas: thanks in advance | |
| 15:46:50 | smcginnis | bauzas: Hey, are you good with the new version on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534807/ ? | |
| 15:47:07 | smcginnis | bauzas: I assume so, but would be good to have your +1 on there for historical reference. | |
| 15:47:22 | bauzas | smcginnis: I'm on it | |
| 15:47:23 | bauzas | +1d | |
| 15:47:28 | gibi | ildikov: then +2 from me :) | |
| 15:47:35 | smcginnis | bauzas: Thanks! | |
| 15:47:39 | bauzas | smcginnis: thanks for the catch on a minor release | |
| 15:48:08 | smcginnis | bauzas: Wouldn't have been the end of the world, but I think this version is more appropriate. ;) | |
| 15:48:28 | ildikov | gibi: much appreciated | |
| 15:48:32 | bauzas | smcginnis: any release documentation about semver we have could help me | |
| 15:48:45 | ildikov | gibi: will update the tests if I have to upload a new version | |
| 15:49:07 | bauzas | in general, I struggle with identifying .y releases, and just accept .zs | |
| 15:49:25 | smcginnis | bauzas: I only know of the site: https://semver.org/ | |
| 15:49:26 | sean-k-mooney | smcginnis: a z stream release would techically have implied abi compatiblity aswell as api compatiblity. we are breaking the abi form 1.8.0 so you were right it should have been 1.9.0 | |
| 15:50:16 | gibi | ildikov: cool. that test nit is not super important | |
| 15:50:21 | smcginnis | It's always a tricky and somewhat subjective thing to look at commit messages and determine. ;) | |
| 15:57:09 | ildikov | gibi: noted, tnx :) | |
| 16:11:59 | openstackgerrit | Tetsuro Nakamura proposed openstack/nova master: Test alloc_cands with indirectly sharing RPs https://review.openstack.org/519601 | |
| 16:12:00 | openstackgerrit | Tetsuro Nakamura proposed openstack/nova master: Support relay RP for allocation candidates https://review.openstack.org/533437 | |
| 16:27:13 | claudiub | stephenfin: hi. can you take a look at the autospec patch? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/447505/ Jenkins says it's ok. thanks! | |
| 16:27:35 | stephenfin | claudiub: Won't get it today, but it's now on the (rather big) list for tomorrow :) | |
| 16:27:44 | claudiub | yeay. :D | |
| 16:51:44 | openstackgerrit | Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Fix libvirt volume tests passing invalid disk_info https://review.openstack.org/529328 | |
| 16:51:44 | openstackgerrit | Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Pass disk_info dict to libvirt_info https://review.openstack.org/529329 | |
| 16:51:45 | openstackgerrit | Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Expose volume host type and path independent of libvirt config https://review.openstack.org/530786 | |
| 16:51:45 | openstackgerrit | Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Remove redundant swap_volume tests https://review.openstack.org/531179 | |
| 16:51:46 | openstackgerrit | Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Don't generate fake disk_info in swap_volume https://review.openstack.org/530787 | |
| 16:51:46 | openstackgerrit | Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Local disk serial numbers for the libvirt driver https://review.openstack.org/529380 | |
| 16:57:08 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Address nits in I46d483f9de6776db1b025f925890624e5e682ada https://review.openstack.org/530462 | |
| 16:57:28 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Remove unnecessary execute permissions in files https://review.openstack.org/533686 | |
| 17:10:22 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: jaypipes stephenfin just fyi os-vif u-c/g-r patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534839/. ye dont need to do anything here ill follow up with infra once zuul comments back | |
| 17:10:38 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: ack, thank you sir | |
| 17:11:08 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: +1d for the sake of consistency with myself | |
| 17:26:55 | cdent | jaypipes, efried : is there code in progress somewhere that includes parent references in the provider summaries of an /allocation_candidates response? (so much code at the moment, hard to find stuff). Or maybe it already done? | |
| 17:27:17 | jaypipes | cdent: I'm currently working on that area | |
| 17:27:48 | cdent | is there anything up in gerrit yet, or is that yet to come? | |
| 17:29:01 | cdent | jaypipes: the reason I ask is because I'm trying to confirm some of my understandings about how this ought to work. | |
| 17:29:15 | cdent | by cooking some gabbi scenarios | |
| 17:29:31 | cdent | but it looks like what I'm trying to do is not quite possible yet | |
| 17:29:41 | jaypipes | cdent: I'm currently working on the alloc candidates stuff with n-r-p in the https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/nested-resource-providers series | |
| 17:30:11 | cdent | yeah, that's where I was looking | |
| 17:31:18 | cdent | jaypipes: is the expectation that in provider summaries, anything with a parent will have parent_provider_uuid field? | |
| 17:33:01 | jaypipes | cdent: yup, zactly. | |
| 17:33:17 | cdent | roger, con aye, ten degrees down bubble | |
| 17:37:14 | openstackgerrit | Jackie Truong proposed openstack/nova master: Account for deprecation of personality files https://review.openstack.org/534849 | |
| 17:51:33 | cdent | jaypipes: another, more theorectical, question. sean-k-mooney has a various times talked about moving vcpu and memory to the nested numa node, in which case the allocation records in allocation_requests will be against that. when that happens are we assuming that the nova-scheduler will climb the provider tree hierarchy... | |
| 17:52:01 | cdent | ...recreated from provider summaries, to find the compute node where the actual spawn will happen? | |
| 17:53:33 | jaypipes | cdent: yes | |
| 17:53:42 | cdent | cool | |
| 18:04:16 | sean-k-mooney | cdent: well we schedule resouce based on the leaf nodes to select the set of roots nodes that can fufil the request so yes. | |
| 18:04:20 | openstackgerrit | Jackie Truong proposed openstack/nova master: Add trusted_image_certificates to REST API https://review.openstack.org/486204 | |
| 18:06:37 | openstackgerrit | Aditya Vaja proposed openstack/nova master: remove IVS plug/unplug as they're moved to separate plugin https://review.openstack.org/534371 | |
| 18:08:07 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: fix _get_trees_matching_all() when sum children https://review.openstack.org/534866 | |
| 18:08:17 | sean-k-mooney | cdent: before we can move the vcpu or other resouce under a numa node i belive there was a distance/ajacency concept that was required also to allow affinity/antiaffinity to be expressed. that is out of scope for the current nested prodiers in queens right jaypipes? | |
| 18:08:22 | jaypipes | efried, gibi: eyeballs needed on the patch ^^ | |
| 18:08:44 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: totally out of scope, yes | |
| 18:09:22 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: and also a prerequec for numa in placement or do you think they can be independent | |
| 18:09:41 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: pre-req | |
| 18:09:48 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: well.... | |
| 18:10:05 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: pre-req if we want placement to do certain numa placement calculations... | |