Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2018-07-26
15:02:56 mriedem but i thought the reason for running scenario tests in serial was more about random failures than it was overall time
15:03:14 mriedem work around for what?
15:03:17 gmann yeah ssh timeout mainly
15:03:24 mriedem ok,
15:03:28 mriedem as far as i know, that's not fixed
15:03:38 mriedem so the workaround would need to be in place
15:04:02 mriedem but imo it shouldn't block adding a purely tempest-slow job that is the same as tempest-full except it runs slow tests
15:04:10 pooja_jadhav mriedem: Hello, need some help
15:04:29 gmann yeah, i am not saying changing that now but if we move scenatio-slow to run only slow then at some point we need scenario parallel testing
15:05:24 gmann "tempest-slow job that is the same as tempest-full except it runs slow tests" - you mean tempest-slow will run all tests including slow?
15:05:34 mriedem ONLY slow
15:05:39 gmann ok.
15:05:48 pooja_jadhav mriedem: If I am doing live migrate, my both nodes(source, destination) referring to nfs shared storage then it should not shh to the destination node. but its going for ssh.
15:06:06 gmann mriedem: make sense.
15:06:21 mriedem gmann: that's what i originally proposed in the ML thread
15:06:27 mriedem http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-May/130394.html
15:07:19 gmann mriedem: ok, ll re iterate that job and update patch. but after rocky
15:10:24 mriedem o/
15:20:56 dansmith gibi: want to hit this? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/434870/
15:20:57 gibi mriedem: I'm +Wing the bottom...
15:21:30 gibi dansmith, mriedem: +W
15:21:42 dansmith thanks
15:21:53 mriedem thanks
15:22:05 dansmith what else needs attention on that set?
15:22:14 mriedem i need to update the nits patch
15:22:14 dansmith gerrit seems kinda confused
15:22:16 mriedem was just looking at that
15:22:22 dansmith is that it?
15:22:26 mriedem yeah
15:22:30 dansmith alright
15:22:32 mriedem once https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522537/ merges it's bp complete
15:22:56 dansmith okay
15:23:20 dansmith the check queue just dropped by 25%
15:23:30 dansmith I wonder if a bunch of things merged or something else
15:25:31 gibi We are at FF so it needs to be something else at this time of the year ;)
15:56:38 dansmith so, if -merges is still accurate, nova hasn't merged anything since midnight
15:56:47 dansmith and a bunch of stuff just flushed out of the gate queue it seems,
15:56:59 dansmith which I assume means a failure
15:57:09 dansmith maybe things will come back via re-queue
16:02:35 Shilpa mordred: HI
16:04:45 mriedem dansmith: doesn't have to be for FF but we should get this in before RC1 so we can drop the reqspec compat code in stein https://review.openstack.org/#/c/581813/
16:05:09 dansmith ack
16:13:16 dansmith mriedem: do you not want to batch those instance queries a bit?
16:13:31 dansmith you're going to end up with a sql query to the api database that has every (live) instance uuid in it
16:13:49 dansmith oh, no
16:13:59 dansmith N queries I guess
16:21:15 mriedem oh i see, using IN (instance_uuids) LIMIT 50
16:21:28 mriedem and then sorting out from the results what is missing
16:22:07 mriedem we also stop once we find at least one per cell
16:27:01 dansmith you do stop once per cell right?
16:27:23 dansmith oh, read that wrong
16:27:25 dansmith yeah, do stop
16:27:46 mriedem right iterate cells, get instances, lookup reqspec per instance
16:28:03 mriedem stop per cell if one is missing
16:48:00 tbachman SRIOV question: does a user have the ability to influence which SRIOV device nova selects when it schedules an instance to a compute host that happens to have multiple SRIOV devices (and in this case, the devices have the same vendor/product IDs)?
16:49:00 mriedem tbachman: you mean in the case that the user doesn't provide a specific port to attach when the server is created?
16:49:07 tbachman I saw the use of flavors to select an SRIOV NIC based on the vendor/product ID, but not something that can uniquely identify a NIC (and yes, this is a pet, not cattle case :-( )
16:49:43 mriedem if you know which nic you want, provide the port when creating the server
16:49:44 tbachman mriedem: is there a way to specify it in the port object?
16:49:56 mriedem i believe there is some wonky port profile stuff
16:49:56 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Retry allocation writes server side https://review.openstack.org/586048
16:50:00 tbachman heh
16:50:01 mriedem with the vendor info in it
16:50:06 tbachman ah
16:50:19 mriedem https://docs.openstack.org/neutron/latest/admin/config-sriov.html
16:50:21 tbachman so, are you saying the user can populate this, and not Nova?
16:50:33 tbachman the binding:profile bits?
16:50:43 tbachman (and Nova will use it
16:50:45 tbachman )
16:51:05 tbachman yeah, I’d been looking at this
16:51:05 mriedem https://docs.openstack.org/neutron/latest/admin/config-sriov.html#launching-instances-with-sr-iov-ports
16:51:42 tbachman so, I see it adding “trusted” to the profile
16:51:45 mriedem i'm not totally sure about the auto policy on the port binding profile
16:51:55 mriedem *auth
16:52:07 mriedem sahid is likely the person to ask about this,
16:52:10 mriedem or sean-k-mooney[m]
16:52:12 tbachman If nova will accept (and use) the information in the profile, then I’m set
16:52:17 tbachman mriedem: thx!
16:53:14 mriedem tbachman: yeah the magic starts here in nova https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/network/neutronv2/api.py#L1825
16:53:27 mriedem that's called from the api to translate the requested port to a pci request which the compute will process
16:53:46 tbachman cool
16:54:08 tbachman mriedem: thanks for that tip!
16:54:09 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Use base test in placement functional tests https://review.openstack.org/585778
16:55:54 mriedem grep VNIC_TYPES_SRIOV in there for other pci thingies with the binding profile
16:56:14 mriedem and if the planets align it might work
16:56:31 tbachman hmmm — I see it add things to the request, but unfortunately I don’t see the PCI device itself
16:56:38 tbachman I’ll follow this path a bit more tho
17:04:37 dansmith mriedem: I left that rebuild test in there because it wasn't failing, but didn't really even look at it
17:05:14 dansmith just needs the unstub treatment yeah?
17:05:29 mriedem dansmith: i'd have to look again, but it didn't do anything
17:05:35 mriedem i mean, i removed some stuff and it didn't fail
17:05:44 dansmith yeah, because of the stub
17:05:49 mriedem i added some things which made it fail
17:05:52 dansmith because it's checking the straight line
17:05:56 mriedem right, so,
17:06:06 dansmith point being, do you want to just remove that like the other one I nuked, or fix it?
17:06:08 melwitt mriedem: need advice from a release perspective, is this considered critical enough to ask for a FFE to fix the install of the NoOp plugin that was the main feature released in 0.11.1? https://review.openstack.org/585530
17:06:12 mriedem well, also because it's not changing the image during rebuild so it doesn't go through the scheduler
17:06:27 mriedem dansmith: i was thinking we could fix the test and add the negative wrinkle
17:06:34 melwitt *1.11.0

Earlier   Later