| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-05-30 | |||
| 18:26:48 | dansmith | right, but this will happen on resize, before confirm, | |
| 18:26:51 | dansmith | which means you will re-raise | |
| 18:26:56 | dansmith | since we don't undefine the domain until confirm | |
| 18:27:48 | mriedem | sure, i was just handling the race with delete bug i was seeing in the gate all the time | |
| 18:27:55 | dansmith | yup | |
| 18:27:59 | mriedem | i figured there would be additional scenarios that need to be dealt with | |
| 18:28:05 | mriedem | once mdbooth smelt what was dealt | |
| 18:30:25 | mdbooth | I don't think that patch will fix this, because it only ignores DiskNotFound if task state is set | |
| 18:30:39 | mdbooth | Which it looks like it's not between resize and confirm | |
| 18:30:41 | dansmith | mdbooth: rightI just said that :) | |
| 18:30:53 | mdbooth | dansmith: Well I wasn't looking! I was reading code. | |
| 18:30:55 | dansmith | mdbooth: that patch was for the deleting task state basically | |
| 18:30:59 | dansmith | mdbooth: keep up! | |
| 18:50:59 | melwitt | dansmith, mriedem: are we cells meeting today? looks like the CERN peeps aren't around today | |
| 18:51:17 | dansmith | oh, I have something on my calendar that covers it up so I wasn't paying attention | |
| 18:51:23 | dansmith | so yeah, cancel if we can | |
| 18:51:26 | dansmith | we just talked last week anyway | |
| 18:51:48 | melwitt | +1 | |
| 18:53:28 | mriedem | don't need to have a meeting, but tssurya has 2 bug fixes that i'm +2 on which you should probably look at | |
| 18:53:38 | melwitt | k | |
| 18:53:41 | dansmith | links | |
| 18:53:52 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/568271/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/567878/ | |
| 18:54:32 | dansmith | I'll get the second | |
| 18:54:38 | dansmith | since online migration | |
| 18:54:56 | melwitt | k | |
| 19:05:41 | mriedem | dansmith: we have backported online data migrations to fix bugs before https://review.openstack.org/#/c/408725/ | |
| 19:06:41 | dansmith | okay, probably want to do a special reno with it though right? so people (if paying attention) will know to re-run them | |
| 19:08:26 | mriedem | yeah i think so, | |
| 19:08:35 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/529389/ was similar but not as explicit, | |
| 19:09:01 | mriedem | the idea just being, if we can get the fix into the stable branches before people roll up to them, then great, else we tried | |
| 19:09:17 | dansmith | sure, that's a fair point | |
| 19:09:44 | dansmith | anyway, wasn't saying we couldn't or shouldn't, just that we should highlight it | |
| 19:09:45 | mriedem | should we put a simple 'fixes' reno on that patch now before backports? | |
| 19:09:57 | mriedem | then we don't need to make it weird on stable | |
| 19:10:26 | dansmith | I think a dedicated reno for the backports will make it more clear, right? "If you are applying this update after already being on the current release, you'll need to re-run online migrations" or something | |
| 19:11:21 | mriedem | sure that works for me as well | |
| 19:11:24 | dansmith | if people see that it's fixed in the stable they're running, but it's still broken for them and they don't realize they would need to re-run online migrations at a peri-release boundary they might be confused | |
| 19:12:20 | mriedem | i'll push the backport to queens once i get done with reviewing sahid's trusted vf series again | |
| 19:19:57 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: configure trust mode for vfs https://review.openstack.org/458514 | |
| 19:19:58 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: add vf_trusted field for network metadata https://review.openstack.org/566343 | |
| 19:19:59 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: metadata: add vf_trusted field to device metadata https://review.openstack.org/566344 | |
| 19:20:00 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: network: update pci request spec to handle trusted tags https://review.openstack.org/458820 | |
| 19:44:29 | efried | jaypipes: Done. mriedem: I'm +2 on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/553597/ now. | |
| 19:46:40 | mriedem | artom: you might want to take a quick run through this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/566344/ | |
| 19:46:47 | mriedem | efried: ok | |
| 19:47:38 | mriedem | "Snarklepuss is actually my middle name, not my surname." blows my mind | |
| 19:47:52 | mriedem | that's professional snark at a PhD level | |
| 19:48:25 | artom | mriedem, indeed, thanks for motivating me | |
| 19:48:38 | artom | That series has been sitting on my review list since forever | |
| 19:49:15 | mriedem | artom: besides that one patch i'm +2 on the rest | |
| 19:49:30 | mriedem | artom: if you're so inclined, you could even address my comments in that one and we could get the entire thing +2ed today | |
| 19:49:50 | artom | mriedem, not a bad idea, sahid's done for the day anyways | |
| 19:50:04 | artom | I don't think he'll mind | |
| 19:50:28 | artom | Will we lose all your +2s if I push/rebaes tho? | |
| 19:50:29 | mriedem | i've been addressing my own nits to keep it going | |
| 19:50:31 | mriedem | so yeah he won't mind | |
| 19:50:34 | mriedem | no | |
| 19:50:41 | artom | "rebaes" | |
| 19:50:52 | mriedem | if you rebase like you spell, we might have problems | |
| 19:50:53 | artom | When you come back to your bae | |
| 19:51:03 | tssurya | mriedem, dansmith: thanks for the reviews, I just got back from a (2 weeks long) vacation and also don't have anything for the meeting. Will catch up on the summit stuff from tomorrow. | |
| 19:51:16 | dansmith | tssurya: cool | |
| 19:51:41 | mriedem | tssurya: rest assured we talked you up big time to belmiro and tim in vancouver | |
| 19:51:56 | tssurya | mriedem: haha thanks a ton!! | |
| 19:52:42 | mriedem | artom: just: git review -d 458820 && git rebase -i HEAD~2 | |
| 19:52:52 | mriedem | fix the one, then git rebase --continue && git review -R -y | |
| 19:53:29 | artom | Ah, yeah, rebasing on the one below it instead of master isn't a bad idea | |
| 19:53:35 | artom | Tiny bit patronizing tho ;) | |
| 19:54:08 | mriedem | right don't rebase on master | |
| 19:54:15 | mriedem | that makes the diffs between patches hard to follow | |
| 19:54:38 | mriedem | i only rebase on master if i have a merge conflict | |
| 19:54:59 | artom | At some point, someone somewhere will make a diff of diffs tool | |
| 19:55:08 | artom | I remember Diana talking about it before she left Red hat | |
| 19:55:17 | dansmith | git review can do that for ou | |
| 19:55:21 | mriedem | tonyb probably already has one | |
| 19:55:39 | artom | dansmith, yeah? Will need to look into that | |
| 19:55:44 | dansmith | git review -m XXX,4,5 | |
| 19:56:03 | mriedem | i'm currently explaining the difference, over text message, between bratwurst, kielbasa and summer sausage | |
| 19:56:10 | mriedem | and can't tell if it's some cruel joke | |
| 19:56:29 | dansmith | git review can't do that | |
| 19:56:48 | dansmith | git review will do anything for love, but it won't ... doo... thaaat. | |
| 19:56:51 | mriedem | git review --sausage-index | |
| 19:56:54 | dansmith | hah | |
| 19:57:24 | dansmith | I think you just did | |
| 19:57:38 | artom | So meta | |
| 20:01:03 | artom | mriedem, so is 'vf_trusted' always going to show in device metadata from now on? And set to True/False? | |
| 20:01:22 | artom | Or it'll only appear if the VF is trusted? | |
| 20:01:31 | artom | (Yeah, I could read, but... :/ ) | |
| 20:01:44 | mriedem | he's always putting it in, | |
| 20:01:50 | mriedem | default to False for old devices, which is correct | |
| 20:02:04 | mriedem | the new field shows up if the requested version on the metadata api is new enough | |
| 20:02:07 | artom | I'm cool with whatever, just wanted to be sure | |
| 20:02:32 | mriedem | i tend to like adding new fields like we do in the compute rest api, which is we add the new field always, we don't expose it conditionally based on it's value | |
| 20:02:50 | dansmith | definitely | |
| 20:03:10 | dansmith | not all languages have a __contains__ type operator, which makes checking for the presence before the value annoying | |
| 20:09:40 | mriedem | efried: jaypipes: +W on the mirror patch | |
| 20:09:53 | efried | süsse | |
| 20:18:31 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Skip ServerShowV254Test.test_rebuild_server in cells v1 job https://review.openstack.org/569454 | |
| 20:21:56 | artom | mriedem, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/566344/7/nova/tests/unit/test_metadata.py@244 | |
| 20:22:52 | artom | we need to include it though, no? We're asserting that the metadata will be equal to those dicts we define, so we need to add vf_trusted=False because we expect the code to generate that | |