| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-01-22 | |||
| 14:07:08 | edmondsw | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/523216/ | |
| 14:08:42 | finucannot | edmondsw: Sure will. Got four series on my backlog but I'm working through an emulator threads bug today. Will probably be tomorrow, I'd say | |
| 14:08:54 | edmondsw | finucannot thanks! | |
| 14:09:54 | openstackgerrit | Eric Berglund proposed openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: SEA https://review.openstack.org/523216 | |
| 14:11:29 | edmondsw | ^ is just a rebase | |
| 14:22:47 | lyarwood | stephenfin: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/523958/ - Do you have time to go over this today? :) | |
| 14:23:13 | openstackgerrit | Eric Berglund proposed openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: vSCSI volume driver https://review.openstack.org/526094 | |
| 14:23:47 | stephenfin | lyarwood: Depends on how big it is. See above :) (tl;dr: /me side-tracked by a bug today) | |
| 14:25:47 | lyarwood | stephenfin: kk, pretty big but tomorrow (morning?) would be fine if that's possible | |
| 14:26:07 | stephenfin | lyarwood: It's top of my list | |
| 14:26:15 | stephenfin | Sorry edmondsw :) You're next in line | |
| 14:26:59 | edmondsw | stephenfin sure :) | |
| 14:29:29 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: i was talking to rodoflo eairlier regarding https://review.openstack.org/#/c/449257/ he needs to move on to yardstick work which means he wont be able to work on this before the code freeze | |
| 14:29:38 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: im going to try an pick it up | |
| 14:30:25 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: you had some changes you wanted regarding the spec dict/object can i ping you later once i have it setup locally to confirm what needs to be done | |
| 14:30:59 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: Sure can. I _think_ they make sense but I'll leave that to you to decide :) | |
| 14:31:02 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: this barly missed pike then we made a lot of change in queens so dont want it to slip to rocky if it can be avoided | |
| 14:31:26 | stephenfin | Agreed. I'd like to get that in, if at all possible | |
| 14:32:34 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: cool am i need to get dan smit to look at that too as he previous gave feedback re using objects | |
| 14:33:43 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: Yup, about versioning. I think the tl;dr: of it was that you can't really remove a field, even if it's unused, and type changes have to have backwards compatibility wrappers provided | |
| 14:33:58 | ameeda | jaypipes: are you around ? | |
| 14:35:32 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: yes he suggested synatsizing the new field form the old using a lazy loader if it was not set. i think rodlofo has that done i just want to make sure he is ok with the filed change you asked for too as i think that field existed before the patch so we cant just convert it to an object. | |
| 14:36:02 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: i need to read the patch again since its been a few weeks since i did so i may be mis remembering | |
| 14:43:27 | gibi | alex_xu: thanks for the update. I'm +2 on the bottom patch. I will review further in that chain soon | |
| 14:43:37 | efried | ameeda I believe Jay is trying to find a spot to work from at the moment. | |
| 14:44:33 | gibi | edmondsw: the SEA patch is on my list | |
| 14:44:53 | edmondsw | gibi great, tx | |
| 14:44:59 | ameeda | efried: hehe, so can you help me ? | |
| 14:45:15 | efried | ameeda Gosh, that depends. What's going on? | |
| 14:45:19 | mriedem | stephenfin: were you working on a nit fixes patch for the websocket proxy security series? | |
| 14:45:42 | ameeda | efried: can you please check this "https://review.openstack.org/#/c/526900/" and notice the scenario from the bug side ? | |
| 14:46:09 | stephenfin | mriedem: Yup, it merged. Lemme know if there's stuff I missed https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534368/ | |
| 14:46:38 | mriedem | stephenfin: ah ok - was just wondering if you wanted to update that docs patch for my one comment or do it in a follow up? | |
| 14:47:37 | efried | ameeda Oh, this patch. Yeah, I looked it over a bit last week and accepted that it's not really in my wheelhouse, sorry. | |
| 14:47:44 | stephenfin | mriedem: If it's just that, I can edit on Gerrit | |
| 14:47:52 | stephenfin | mriedem: reply left, in any case | |
| 14:48:10 | mriedem | stephenfin: just edit inline and i'll +W | |
| 14:48:33 | bauzas | mriedem: welcome back | |
| 14:48:38 | mriedem | thanks | |
| 14:48:39 | bauzas | mriedem: for your pleasure, we have https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1744325 | |
| 14:48:41 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1744325 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "If a rebuild is refused by the scheduler, the instance's imageref is not rolled back" [Critical,In progress] - Assigned to int32bit (int32bit) | |
| 14:48:57 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: doc: Document TLS security setup for noVNC proxy https://review.openstack.org/500544 | |
| 14:49:19 | stephenfin | mriedem: Done (y) | |
| 14:49:44 | mriedem | bauzas: tagged for rc potential but not going to look at it for awhile | |
| 14:49:58 | bauzas | mriedem: I'm following the change | |
| 14:50:36 | bauzas | I'll see how it goes, and try to help next week if we haven't reached to a clear solution | |
| 14:51:28 | ameeda | efried: thank you ! | |
| 14:51:34 | mriedem | it's not fun but i wouldn't say it's the worst bug i've ever seen, | |
| 14:51:52 | mriedem | considering until queens, if you tried rebuilding a volume-backed server, we'd always fail to do so and still change the imageref on the instance | |
| 14:54:16 | bauzas | mriedem: hmmm, you're right | |
| 15:02:25 | cdent | edleafe, efried: would be good to get this stack merged before we start merging all the big stuff so that it is useful in the inevitable debugging we will need to do: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/526557/ | |
| 15:04:21 | edleafe | cdent: ack | |
| 15:05:24 | Roamer` | mriedem, welcome back! What are the chances of the StorPool volume attachment driver? I know it's close to the deadline, but you said if we got our ducks in a row... and the last duck, 533046, has been merged for a week | |
| 15:05:58 | Roamer` | and right now we're in a weird position where the main use case for our Cinder and os-brick drivers is not in OpenStack proper :) | |
| 15:06:01 | mriedem | bauzas: comments inline in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/536268/ | |
| 15:06:24 | bauzas | mriedem: k, will look | |
| 15:06:29 | mriedem | bauzas: it's breaking evacuate potentially, and it's also missing rolling back a bunch of other properties, so it's probably not worth trying to rollback any properties since we'd be totally half assing it | |
| 15:06:42 | mriedem | might as well just put the instance into ERROR state and make the user rebuild with a valid image to fix things | |
| 15:06:50 | Roamer` | mriedem, sorry, of course I'm talking about https://review.openstack.org/#/c/140733/ (certainly this is not the only thing on your plate...) | |
| 15:07:15 | mriedem | Roamer`: i'll take a look | |
| 15:07:21 | bauzas | mriedem: oh, excellent catch | |
| 15:07:22 | mriedem | still trying to get my bearings | |
| 15:07:28 | Roamer` | mriedem, of course, thanks a lot! | |
| 15:07:53 | mriedem | bauzas: can you re-approve https://review.openstack.org/#/c/528128/ ? | |
| 15:08:07 | mriedem | so we can get the series of novaclient microversion changes flushed for a final release | |
| 15:08:07 | bauzas | mriedem: I'm half-reviewing, half-testing my own series, so apologies for not fully getting all the context in mind | |
| 15:08:14 | mriedem | bauzas: np | |
| 15:08:56 | bauzas | mriedem: oh, the novaclient change is just a rebase ? +wd | |
| 15:09:01 | mriedem | yeah | |
| 15:09:02 | mriedem | thanks | |
| 15:09:25 | bauzas | mriedem: I tried to look at the multiattach thing while you were on vacations | |
| 15:09:35 | bauzas | mriedem: that's an excellent job you made honestly | |
| 15:10:00 | bauzas | we're still missing the API bits, but I understand now the logic | |
| 15:10:23 | bauzas | I like the fact to short-cut the multiattach if we don't support that by the compute | |
| 15:12:45 | mriedem | bauzas: i saw thanks for reviewing those, | |
| 15:12:56 | mriedem | the short circuit was copied from artom's tagged attach stuff | |
| 15:14:39 | efried | cdent I'm still pretty confused what you're getting at here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/532290/ | |
| 15:14:47 | bauzas | mriedem: btw. I have a question for you | |
| 15:15:04 | bauzas | mriedem: I'm hardly-testing my vGPU changes on a dedicated box | |
| 15:15:16 | bauzas | mriedem: and I'm testing all the instance operations | |
| 15:15:31 | bauzas | mriedem: for providing a good release note about what can be supported and what not | |
| 15:15:38 | openstackgerrit | Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Local disk serial numbers for the libvirt driver https://review.openstack.org/529380 | |
| 15:15:46 | efried | cdent If ironic gets its traits and they're not different from what's in the cache, we won't make the API call. Which is as it should be. Am I missing something? | |
| 15:15:50 | bauzas | mriedem: so, the point is, when I tried to suspend an instance, libvirt popped up an exception | |
| 15:15:53 | cdent | efried: I'm asking for the authors of the patch to acknowledge that they are aware of the quoted lines of provider tree code. This is because elsewhere in the stack there's been discussion of "this doesn't work with provider tree yet" | |
| 15:16:03 | bauzas | mriedem: basically because we don't accept to hot-unplug mediated devices | |
| 15:16:11 | cdent | It could be all that is needed is "yeah, we know, it's fine" | |
| 15:16:54 | bauzas | mriedem: now, the question is, would you be OK if I would just transform that libvirt exception in a more-readable exception like "sorry, but you can't suspend your instance because $vGPUs" | |
| 15:17:03 | bauzas | and leave the instance into ERROR | |
| 15:17:20 | bauzas | of course, the user can reset the state or rebuild | |
| 15:17:48 | mriedem | bauzas: i don't think the instance should be in ERROR state in that case, | |
| 15:17:51 | mriedem | since we didn't change the guest | |
| 15:17:58 | mriedem | you'd get a fault recorded as to why the suspend failed | |
| 15:18:01 | mriedem | which is probably good enough | |
| 15:18:05 | bauzas | set it back to ACTIVE | |
| 15:18:08 | bauzas | then | |
| 15:18:14 | bauzas | mmm, good call | |
| 15:18:46 | mriedem | yeah i guess you'd revert to the original vm_state, which right now can only be active in the API | |
| 15:19:47 | mriedem | johnthetubaguy: replied to your question in the multiattach api change https://review.openstack.org/#/c/271047/ - i think we're covered for the attach flow, but in a different way | |
| 15:20:39 | johnthetubaguy | mriedem: ah... got it | |