| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-03-07 | |||
| 15:54:47 | mriedem | don't think you can put comments in that yaml file for the regex can you? it looks like those comments are literally going into the regex intput | |
| 15:54:49 | mriedem | *input | |
| 15:58:31 | idlemind | hmm still can't get svm (amd nested) presented to a guest instance ... it's enabled on both hosts (cat /sys/module/kvm_amd/parameters/nested = 1). cpu_mode is host-passthrough and i see the model name correctly matches the underlying hardware directly but svm isn't picked up by the guest os | |
| 16:02:02 | cdent | mriedem: when you have a moment can you let me know what you'd like to have in place (spec, blueprint, whatever) to get the -2 lifted from https://review.openstack.org/#/c/362766/ (that's the optional placement db stuff). thanks. | |
| 16:06:57 | mriedem | cdent: reading the notes on the -2, it sounds like we talked about it at one point in a nova meeting and asked for a spec to cover the details of the change, how it gets rolled into CI (maybe the nova-next job?), and how to avoid whatever issue we had when it was merged and then reverted in newton (which i wasn't involved with at the time) | |
| 16:07:22 | mriedem | as dansmith mentioned at the ptg, you could run a separate placement db today, | |
| 16:07:39 | mriedem | if you point the nova.conf placement is using at a different placement database using the nova_api schema | |
| 16:07:46 | cdent | mriedem: aye | |
| 16:08:03 | mriedem | which in a spec i guess just goes under 'alternatives' | |
| 16:08:52 | cdent | now that that stuff is within a suite of other changes would you suggest that the spec covers all of it (in one spec) or something else? | |
| 16:09:31 | mriedem | suite of other changes == moving imports around? | |
| 16:10:31 | cdent | moving imports, moving objects into placemnet hierarchy, changing db config to use its own code (instead of the nova one which does more than needed) | |
| 16:11:01 | mriedem | i wouldn't lump that into the 'be able to run nova-api and placement-api on the same host with a single config but different dbs' thing | |
| 16:11:11 | mriedem | that other stuff is more general 'extract placement' | |
| 16:11:21 | mriedem | of which the separate db is a part | |
| 16:11:32 | cdent | ✔ | |
| 16:11:54 | mriedem | another alternative to this, | |
| 16:12:24 | mriedem | is you could run nova-api and placement-api on the same host, not venv/containers, but if you had a config file strictly for placement, then you'd just run the placement service using that config file | |
| 16:13:16 | mriedem | nova-api --config-file /etc/nova/nova.conf && placement-api --config-file /etc/nova/placement.conf ? | |
| 16:14:50 | cdent | the way I did it in the current change was done that way mostly to make "doing stuff in devstack (and thus CI)" relatively easy: add a single config setting, set it, done | |
| 16:15:14 | mriedem | which might be how everyone else deploys everything today, | |
| 16:15:30 | cdent | the container experiments I'm doing use a custom config file for the container, which is a severely curtailed nova.conf | |
| 16:15:50 | mriedem | so unless i'm missing something, it seems to be a trade off between ease of deployment for nova + placement with a single config file, vs nova not doing this and just leaving it up to packagers/deployment tooling to handle the split if they want a split | |
| 16:16:22 | mriedem | eventually once placement is split out and has it's own placement.conf, it would just have a single [database] option group right? | |
| 16:16:50 | cdent | My feeling is that the optional config thing is just a convenience to make life easier (for us and other people) during whatever length of transition we have. | |
| 16:17:08 | cdent | It, uh, leaves options open... | |
| 16:17:18 | mriedem | pun intended | |
| 16:18:29 | mriedem | well i guess specaroo that thing, list the alternatives vs what this would buy people, and then maybe we can get some operator/deployment tooling folks feedback on the options and see if it justifies doing this | |
| 16:18:32 | cdent | when extraction happens I'd been inclined to continue naming the database.connection as placement_database.connection because it means we can add some other database later without whatever-ness | |
| 16:18:57 | cdent | roger. con aye. ten degrees down bubble | |
| 16:19:22 | mriedem | ftr, i'd also like just to defer to melwitt :) | |
| 16:19:33 | cdent | mriedem: sure, but it's your -2 | |
| 16:19:39 | mriedem | yeah | |
| 16:21:02 | openstackgerrit | Eric Berglund proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: PowerVM Driver: Localdisk https://review.openstack.org/549300 | |
| 16:25:19 | openstackgerrit | Eric Berglund proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: PowerVM Driver: Localdisk https://review.openstack.org/549300 | |
| 16:29:26 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: hyper-v: Logs tips on PortBindingFailed https://review.openstack.org/539584 | |
| 16:29:36 | hrw | anyone with spare time to look at PCIe hotplug patch? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/545034/ one | |
| 16:29:41 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova stable/queens: Pass user context to virt driver when detaching volume https://review.openstack.org/550220 | |
| 16:37:01 | stephenfin | hrw: Done, and sorry for the delay. It looks pretty good to me. Just a couple of nits in there | |
| 16:37:15 | hrw | stephenfin: thx | |
| 16:38:42 | hrw | stephenfin: good comments | |
| 16:38:48 | hrw | stephenfin: discussion was on irc | |
| 16:39:21 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Add os-testr in test-requirements.txt https://review.openstack.org/550329 | |
| 16:39:29 | stephenfin | ralonsoh, sean-k-mooney: Dumb question, but could either of you clarify the difference between provider network and physical network? | |
| 16:40:31 | stephenfin | ralonsoh, sean-k-mooney: I _think_ a physical network is just a arbitrary string used to identify networks that are wired up together, so multiple provider networks on the same host could have the same physnet | |
| 16:40:35 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: a provider netwok is a l2 network that is affinitised to a phyical network. e.g. vlan 100 + physnet1 defines the wirelevel segmenation of the neutron network | |
| 16:41:05 | sean-k-mooney | vlan 100 + physnet2 can be a different neutorn netwok. | |
| 16:41:28 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: Right. Neutron doesn't have anything like a phynet object though, right? It's a just an attribute of the provider network? | |
| 16:41:57 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: correct physnet is just a name given to a specific copper/optical network | |
| 16:41:58 | stephenfin | hrw: Np. If you can get a link to the IRC discussion, that would be helpful. If not, maybe libvirt has this documented somewhere? | |
| 16:42:20 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: correct its just an attibute of the neutron network not an object | |
| 16:42:26 | hrw | stephenfin: was not documented. and we discussed glitches too | |
| 16:43:05 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: its defined by this api https://github.com/openstack/neutron-lib/blob/master/neutron_lib/api/definitions/provider_net.py | |
| 16:43:15 | idlemind | grr; this is killing me, still no svm passed into the guest i've tried changing the machine type .. can i force the feature via metadata into the libvirt xml somehow? | |
| 16:43:39 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: Awesome. So one provider network will be associated with one physnet. I assume you could have multiple provider networks using the same physnet? | |
| 16:43:54 | openstackgerrit | Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez proposed openstack/os-vif master: Add native implementation OVSDB API https://review.openstack.org/482226 | |
| 16:43:57 | stephenfin | Not that you'd want to/need to, but out of curiosity | |
| 16:44:08 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: that depend on the network type | |
| 16:44:42 | sean-k-mooney | you can only have one flat network per provider but you can also have 4096 vlan networks and 4096^2 QinQ networks | |
| 16:46:00 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: Ah, ok, so the VLAN case is why we should track physnet for that configuration option rather than provider network | |
| 16:46:01 | sean-k-mooney | its common to use the flat network as you wan uplink and then vlan networks for tenants on a singel physnet | |
| 16:47:07 | andreaf | mriedem I think that's something that changed on Tempest side because it used to work | |
| 16:47:12 | stephenfin | Seeing as each provider network will be using the same physical network and therefore the same OVS bridge and NICs (in the simple case) | |
| 16:47:40 | andreaf | mriedem the regex I mean - mtreinish could be something related to the changes we had around tempest run recently? | |
| 16:49:55 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: yes. this is why you dont want to use network affinity but rather us the physnet to aggregate many networks | |
| 16:50:59 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: Excellent. Thanks for the info :) | |
| 16:52:20 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: this might be useful too https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/doc/source/admin/intro-os-networking.rst#provider-networks | |
| 16:52:55 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: Sounds good. I'd been relying on this one so far https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openstack_platform/10/html/networking_guide/sec-connect-instance#using_flat_provider_networks | |
| 16:54:07 | claudiub | stephenfin: that looks like a spec-ial ocasion for a guiness. :D | |
| 16:54:39 | openstackgerrit | Marcin Juszkiewicz proposed openstack/nova master: Allow to configure amount of PCIe ports https://review.openstack.org/545034 | |
| 16:55:03 | hrw | stephenfin: comments addressed. channel was not publically logged from what I see so no log | |
| 16:55:18 | stephenfin | hrw: Cool. Thanks for checking that out | |
| 16:55:31 | hrw | stephenfin: thanks for looking ;) | |
| 16:56:07 | hrw | stephenfin: like I said at PTG: addressing comments quickly allows to keep reviewer's attention to go for a second look ;) | |
| 16:57:12 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Run post-test archive against cell1 https://review.openstack.org/550194 | |
| 16:57:13 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add simple db purge command https://review.openstack.org/550171 | |
| 16:57:13 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add --purge helper flag to archive_deleted_rows https://review.openstack.org/550182 | |
| 16:57:14 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Make nova-manage db purge take --all-cells https://review.openstack.org/550502 | |
| 16:57:46 | stephenfin | hrw: I kind of think that warning is necessary. If you don't have that, how will the operator know their specially configured option is doing zilch? | |
| 16:57:46 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: its rather old but i used to send people this https://web.archive.org/web/20151006051825/https://www.rdoproject.org//Networking_in_too_much_detail to understand how openstack networking works with ovs but the offical netwoking guide is now pretty good too | |
| 16:57:52 | idlemind | holy fork; if i manually edit the vm w/virsh and add <feature policy='require' name='svm'>/> and reboot the instance in openstack i get svm passed into the guest ... i imagine this could get lost if the vm is migrated? | |
| 16:57:54 | openstackgerrit | Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Allow scheduling only to enabled cells (Filter Scheduler) https://review.openstack.org/550527 | |
| 16:58:34 | hrw | stephenfin: are there all options covered with such warning? | |
| 16:58:37 | idlemind | and there doesn't seem to be a way to force feature policy 'require' into kvm / libvirt vm definitions am i right? | |
| 16:58:45 | idlemind | (through metadata of an image) | |
| 16:58:47 | hrw | stephenfin: openstack logs are already overloaded with text in them | |
| 16:59:03 | sean-k-mooney | idlemind: it will remain untill a hard reboot is done or any other event that cause the xml to be regenerated(migration resize, hard reboot) | |
| 16:59:11 | hrw | like 100 characters of some random uuid like stuff before any useful data goes | |
| 16:59:31 | idlemind | sean-k-mooney thanks; anyway to get openstack to persistently add a feature 'require' statement for libvirt? | |
| 17:00:02 | sean-k-mooney | idlemind: i belive there is a way via image metadata | |
| 17:00:04 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/queens: hyper-v: Logs tips on PortBindingFailed https://review.openstack.org/550529 | |
| 17:00:39 | openstackgerrit | Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez proposed openstack/os-vif master: Add abstract OVSDB API https://review.openstack.org/476612 | |
| 17:01:03 | stephenfin | hrw: We do tend to warn for things like that alright, e.g. [1]. Not sure how consistent we are though. [1] https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L548-L562 | |
| 17:01:26 | stephenfin | hrw: I could be wrong though. Perhaps mriedem or someone could weigh in? | |
| 17:01:45 | hrw | stephenfin: those you linked are close to log.error() level like | |
| 17:01:55 | idlemind | sean-k-mooney i've been trying but failing it would seem cim_pasd_instructionsetextension seems to be close but those values don't trickle into libvirt at least w/host-passthrough on | |
| 17:02:10 | stephenfin | Doesn't that seem sane though? I mean, we told nova to do something and it can't do it | |
| 17:02:19 | stephenfin | Someone should probably be told about that | |
| 17:02:27 | mriedem | what is the question? | |
| 17:02:45 | stephenfin | mriedem: comment here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/545034/13/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py | |