| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-04-18 | |||
| 10:43:32 | openstackgerrit | Naichuan Sun proposed openstack/nova master: xenapi(N-R-P): Add API to support vgpu resource provider create https://review.openstack.org/520313 | |
| 10:47:55 | fghaas | lyarwood: I proposed the backport that kashyap just mentioned; I'm here if you need additional info on how exactly we bumped into this in Ocata | |
| 10:49:16 | lyarwood | sorry just on a call, I'll catch up in ~50mins | |
| 10:49:56 | openstackgerrit | Naichuan Sun proposed openstack/nova master: xenapi: Use XAPI pool instead of aggregate pool for shared SR migration https://review.openstack.org/554154 | |
| 10:50:02 | fghaas | lyarwood: no rush at all, just wanted to let you know — will be here for several hours | |
| 11:05:44 | jaypipes | naichuans, jianghuaw_: still around? | |
| 11:31:13 | jaypipes | sahid: reviewing the cpu_shared_set patches again now. | |
| 11:36:38 | jaypipes | sahid: +2 on all. | |
| 11:40:51 | sahid | jaypipes: whaa thanks, i did not expected you to be so active on it :) | |
| 11:42:13 | jaypipes | sahid: let's "git r done" ;) | |
| 12:24:57 | efried | kashyap: Good deal man. | |
| 12:29:24 | openstackgerrit | Yikun Jiang (Kero) proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: complex policy https://review.openstack.org/553776 | |
| 12:38:52 | naichuans | jaypipes: Hi, Jay, I'm still here | |
| 12:48:15 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Suggest when to propose notification changes https://review.openstack.org/562265 | |
| 12:49:21 | jaypipes | naichuans: hi! so my primary concern is that the virt driver will be adding and removing resource provider records based on a "blip" of some device turning on and off. | |
| 12:49:35 | kashyap | efried: Still ~14 more clean-ups to do. Since this time the (libvirt / QEMU) version increment been a larger jump (because we didn't bump in "Queens"), need to clean up a lot more constants & compat code. | |
| 12:53:00 | naichuans | jaypipes: understood :) we decide to skip removing rp operation, and keep adding.We can't get allocation information in update_provider_tree. So it is difficult to check if the GPU is used by a VM or not. I remove the unavailable rps removing code. If nova schedule to a unavailable rp, then would be a failure and re-schedule | |
| 12:53:46 | naichuans | jaypipes: Any suggestion? | |
| 12:59:33 | bauzas | jaypipes: naichuans: I think we agreed to ask operators to not modify the config opt if so | |
| 13:00:04 | bauzas | at least because it would trample the compute service to understand how many vGPUs are used | |
| 13:00:36 | bauzas | if you want to modify that opt, destroy all your instances using vGPUs IMHO | |
| 13:01:12 | naichuans | Ah, if operators don't modify the config files, then the issue should not happen~ | |
| 13:01:56 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Fix docs for confirmResize action https://review.openstack.org/562062 | |
| 13:04:50 | openstackgerrit | Nguyen Hai proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Follow the new PTI for document build https://review.openstack.org/551802 | |
| 13:05:12 | naichuans | jaypipes: bauzas: done? | |
| 13:05:26 | bauzas | done by what? | |
| 13:06:04 | naichuans | I mean we will assume operators would not change config opts? | |
| 13:09:30 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Fix docs for confirmResize action https://review.openstack.org/562062 | |
| 13:34:59 | Shilpa | stephenfin: hi | |
| 13:35:25 | Shilpa | stephenfin: changes https://review.openstack.org/#/c/550172/3/ not working, any further inputs to resolve this? | |
| 13:44:37 | jaypipes | naichuans, bauzas: sorry, I really don't understand what you mean by config opts and operators. | |
| 13:45:28 | bauzas | I mean that enabled_vgpu_types shouldn't be modified | |
| 13:45:54 | bhagyashris | efried; Hi, | |
| 13:46:02 | efried | bhagyashris: Hello | |
| 13:46:12 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Proposes NUMA topology with RPs https://review.openstack.org/552924 | |
| 13:46:22 | efried | bhagyashris: It looked like you were getting ready to talk to me yesterday, and then... didn't. | |
| 13:47:23 | jaypipes | bauzas: that's not what we've been discussing, though. we've been discussing removing resource providers that temporarily become "unavailable" due to maintenance or down state, etc. And I have been telling naichuans and jianghuaw_ that it would be best to not auto-remove those resource providers based on some transient state. | |
| 13:47:39 | bhagyashris | efried: Regarding the patches https://review.openstack.org/#/c/560444/ , https://review.openstack.org/#/c/560459/2 I have fixed the unit test case part. so should i need to write the functional test as well? | |
| 13:48:12 | efried | bhagyashris: I think that would be nice, certainly. | |
| 13:48:23 | efried | bhagyashris: A functional test that behaves exactly like your live setup did. | |
| 13:48:49 | naichuans | jaypipes: like jianghua's comment, we mean modify the nova.conf to change supported vgpu types | |
| 13:49:08 | efried | bhagyashris: I would even say you should submit that functional test in its own patch, *before* the above changes, demonstrating that it produces the *wrong* result; and then with the above patches, flip it over to demonstrate the *right* result. | |
| 13:49:26 | efried | bhagyashris: Also, if we don't already have a LP bug open for this, we should do that. | |
| 13:49:45 | efried | dammit bauzas, I was in the middle of reviewing that! | |
| 13:49:54 | Kevin_Zheng | gibi efried , Hi thanks for the reviews, I’m totally fine with adding req Id also to update notifications, I will do it tomorrow, could you guys also check https://review.openstack.org/#/c/560748 it make update notification tests using common sample, so if it got merged I don’t have to rebase ;) | |
| 13:50:05 | bauzas | efried: thank Zuul | |
| 13:50:10 | efried | sigh | |
| 13:50:34 | bauzas | just a doc -1 because I was missing 2 blank lines | |
| 13:50:37 | efried | Kevin_Zheng: I don't know if adding req IDs to those other objects is appropriate - gibi what do you think? | |
| 13:50:39 | bhagyashris | efried: yes and there is test for update_provider_tree in nova/tests/functional/test_servers.py so accordingly i will need to add fuctional test write | |
| 13:50:44 | jaypipes | naichuans: and what happens if there are allocations on a pGPU that you end up removing from the enabled_vgpu_types CONF? | |
| 13:50:54 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: Add regression test for bug #1764883 https://review.openstack.org/562072 | |
| 13:50:54 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: WIP compute: Ignore active evacuations during _init_instance https://review.openstack.org/562284 | |
| 13:50:54 | openstack | bug 1764883 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Evacuation fails if the source host returns while the migration is still in progress" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1764883 | |
| 13:51:13 | bauzas | jaypipes: I'm fine with your point too | |
| 13:51:43 | efried | bhagyashris: Yes. I don't know where libvirt-specific functional tests live, but that would be the idea. | |
| 13:51:51 | jaypipes | naichuans: at a bare minimum, I'd like to see some handling of a failed delete of a resource provider due to, say, an allocation existing against that provider. | |
| 13:52:40 | efried | bhagyashris: But I'm saying, also a functional test that hits the specific scenario you demonstrated - where the sharing provider was ignored before the fix (the DISK_GB shows up in the compute node RP) but is observed after the fix (shows up in the sharing provider). | |
| 13:52:59 | naichuans | jaypipes: will check it and add the error handling | |
| 13:53:10 | Kevin_Zheng | efried: gibi replied in the patch, he thought it is better to add it for InstanceUpdatePayload but not in status update | |
| 13:56:19 | bhagyashris | efried: ok, any idea or is there any reference that the test written for libvirt | |
| 13:56:58 | efried | bhagyashris: I have no idea. I know nothing about libvirt :) | |
| 13:57:06 | efried | bhagyashris: I thought *you* were the expert there :P | |
| 13:57:20 | efried | Maybe kashyap knows... | |
| 13:57:23 | stephenfin | Shilpa: No idea, sadly. Could you pull it down and deploy it locally. See what happens | |
| 13:57:40 | stephenfin | Shilpa: I imagine the issue is with nova and how it's parsing the URL. Can't say for sure though | |
| 13:57:53 | jaypipes | naichuans: ty! | |
| 13:58:46 | naichuans | np :) | |
| 13:59:44 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Spec for volume multiattach enhancements https://review.openstack.org/552078 | |
| 14:00:01 | bhagyashris | efried: ohh :) i will try my best | |
| 14:00:54 | Shilpa | stephenfin: i have tested tempst locally for patch set 2, for noVNC v1.0.0, test_novnc failed with 'Not a valid html document in the response.' error and for stable/v0.6, test_novnc failed with 'AssertionError: True is not false : Token must be invalid because the connection closed.' | |
| 14:08:43 | gibi | Kevin_Zheng: thanks. I will look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/560748 shortly | |
| 14:09:47 | stephenfin | jaypipes, sahid: I have small questions on the first and last of these three patches. Fancy taking a look so I can go/no-go? https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/overhead-pin-set+status:open | |
| 14:10:38 | efried | kashyap: bhagyashris was looking for guidance as to where one might find/add libvirt-specific functional tests. I allowed as how I know nothing about libvirt.... but you might. | |
| 14:10:43 | jaypipes | stephenfin: sure thing | |
| 14:13:29 | jaypipes | stephenfin: answered. | |
| 14:13:35 | stephenfin | ta | |
| 14:22:52 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Add CPUWeigher https://review.openstack.org/379525 | |
| 14:30:09 | kashyap | efried: Sorry, being pinged on 4 places, just noticed your response. | |
| 14:30:40 | kashyap | efried: This is the place where I see libvirt functional tests: nova/nova/tests/functional/libvirt | |
| 14:31:00 | efried | well that would make sense :) | |
| 14:31:01 | efried | bhagyashris: ^ | |
| 14:36:02 | sahid | stephenfin: stephenfin, jaypipes I replied to you about rasing an exception | |
| 14:36:24 | sahid | it's not something we should do actually | |
| 14:41:18 | jaypipes | sahid: yep, you made a good point. | |
| 14:41:58 | bhagyashris | efried: thank you :) | |
| 14:42:21 | bhagyashris | kashyap: Thank you :) | |
| 14:44:33 | arvindn05 | bauzas: are you available for the review of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/560718/ - Handle rebuild of instance with new image | |
| 14:44:33 | arvindn05 | ? | |
| 14:45:13 | bauzas | arvindn05: for 15 mins because of an appointment but yes | |
| 14:45:19 | arvindn05 | cool... | |
| 14:46:04 | sahid | jaypipes: cool | |
| 14:46:08 | arvindn05 | did you see alex_xu latest comment? he suggests rejecting images with new traits | |
| 14:46:37 | sahid | stephenfin: i will respin the fix put the option under [compute] section. I'm not sure i understand why of your comments about '::' | |
| 14:47:01 | stephenfin | sahid: Sweet, thanks :) Just replying to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/510897 now | |
| 14:47:24 | arvindn05 | IMO, i think its too much of an edge case to put in logic to handle it... | |
| 14:47:42 | stephenfin | sahid: If you put '::' at the end of the line, the next line is formatted as monospace text, i.e. code. I think that's what you want there, rather than the block comment | |
| 14:47:49 | stephenfin | e.g. | |
| 14:47:57 | stephenfin | here's some descriptive text:: | |
| 14:48:02 | stephenfin | ||