| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-10-10 | |||
| 07:14:09 | openstackgerrit | Lucian Petrut proposed openstack/nova master: Fix os-simple-tenant-usage result order https://review.openstack.org/608685 | |
| 08:38:11 | ygk12345 | hi all | |
| 08:38:23 | ygk12345 | I am unable to unshelve an instance whihc is in shelve offload state | |
| 08:39:24 | bauzas | ygk12345: stack trace ? | |
| 08:39:50 | openstackgerrit | Brin Zhang proposed openstack/nova master: Add microversion 2.67 to support volume_type https://review.openstack.org/606398 | |
| 08:40:09 | ygk12345 | the instance is still in shelved state and in shutdown state | |
| 08:40:15 | ygk12345 | bauzas: it is mitaka | |
| 08:41:02 | ygk12345 | bauzas: I dont see any hypervisor allocated to it | |
| 08:42:31 | ygk12345 | bauzas: DEBUG (session:277) RESP: [404] Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 08:41:47 GMT Content-Length: 52 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Compute-Request-Id: req-f192f22e-9cd9-4b41-9863-c9752acbf95f RESP BODY: 404 Not Found The resource could not be found. | |
| 08:42:45 | ygk12345 | bauzas: is it deleted ? | |
| 08:46:32 | bauzas | ygk12345: do you have an ERROR log when unshelving? | |
| 08:46:42 | ygk12345 | no | |
| 08:47:06 | ygk12345 | it is saying "resource could not be found" in the debug output | |
| 08:49:43 | bauzas | ygk12345: what tells you the os-instance-actions API ? | |
| 08:51:09 | openstackgerrit | Brin Zhang proposed openstack/nova master: Add restrictions on ``updated_at`` when getting migrations https://review.openstack.org/607798 | |
| 08:55:16 | openstackgerrit | Brin Zhang proposed openstack/nova master: Add restrictions on ``updated_at`` when getting instance action records https://review.openstack.org/607801 | |
| 08:56:35 | openstackgerrit | Brin Zhang proposed openstack/nova master: Add restrictions on ``updated_at`` when getting migrations https://review.openstack.org/607798 | |
| 08:58:57 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Remove force flag from live-migrate and evacuate https://review.openstack.org/609330 | |
| 09:07:41 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Merge used_limits extension response into limit view builder https://review.openstack.org/606031 | |
| 09:07:58 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Merge image_size extension response into image view builder https://review.openstack.org/606845 | |
| 09:08:32 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove more code related to extensions and testing https://review.openstack.org/607088 | |
| 09:21:50 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP]Remove extensions loading framework from wsgi.py https://review.openstack.org/607092 | |
| 09:35:08 | openstackgerrit | Yikun Jiang proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Support initial allocation ratios https://review.openstack.org/552105 | |
| 10:10:49 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: docs: Don't configure '[scheduler] discover_hosts_in_cells_interval' https://review.openstack.org/609345 | |
| 10:10:49 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: conf: Deprecate the 'discover_hosts_in_cells_interval' option https://review.openstack.org/609346 | |
| 10:16:39 | gmann | alex_xu: do you remember any case where we extended the response of action class with @wsgi.extends(action ? | |
| 10:17:01 | gmann | alex_xu: this case - https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/6bf11e1dc14afad78b11d980c2544a3dc41579ff/nova/api/openstack/wsgi.py#L772 | |
| 10:17:53 | gmann | alex_xu: because that is what populate self.wsgi_action_extensions - https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/6bf11e1dc14afad78b11d980c2544a3dc41579ff/nova/api/openstack/wsgi.py#L489 | |
| 10:18:20 | gmann | alex_xu: this list goes as action (self.wsgi_action) - https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/compute/routes.py#L266 | |
| 10:19:20 | gmann | alex_xu: so we are good to remove the self.wsgi_action_extensions too along with self.wsgi_xtensions. | |
| 10:51:47 | alex_xu | gmann: I thought wsgi_action_extensions is for the whole action? | |
| 10:51:55 | alex_xu | not just the response of the action | |
| 10:55:12 | alex_xu | gmann: I think you are right | |
| 10:55:43 | alex_xu | gmann: we don't need 'register_extensions' method at all | |
| 10:57:17 | gmann | alex_xu: yea. | |
| 11:02:59 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Use oslo_db.sqlalchemy.test_fixtures https://review.openstack.org/609352 | |
| 11:17:01 | openstackgerrit | Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez proposed openstack/os-vif master: [DNM] test linux pytoute impl https://review.openstack.org/609354 | |
| 11:59:44 | aspiers | melwitt: following on from my colleague JP's discussion with nova folks at the PTG regarding adding AMD SEV support to nova, I've done a bunch of research regarding possible implementations and am writing a spec and bp which I hope to submit very shortly. Thought I'd give you a heads-up just in case there's anything you'd like to discuss. | |
| 12:53:58 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova stable/rocky: Time how long select_destinations() takes in conductor https://review.openstack.org/608575 | |
| 12:54:19 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova stable/rocky: Replace usage of get_legacy_facade() with get_engine() https://review.openstack.org/608574 | |
| 12:54:54 | mikeoschen | join #openstack-sdks | |
| 12:57:12 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove the extensions framework from wsgi.py https://review.openstack.org/607092 | |
| 13:04:13 | pooja_jadhav | hi team, how I can create a BFV instance in the api-sample-tests for testing. please guide me for the same. | |
| 13:05:59 | pooja_jadhav | I am referring https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/85b36cd2f82ccd740057c1bee08fc722209604ab/nova/tests/functional/api_sample_tests/api_samples/servers/v2.42/server-create-req.json.tpl | |
| 13:07:11 | pooja_jadhav | for creating an instance. but compute_utils. is_volume_backed giving False for the instance. | |
| 13:11:27 | pooja_jadhav | gmann: ^^ | |
| 13:13:30 | gmann | pooja_jadhav: oh, that did not work ? | |
| 13:14:18 | pooja_jadhav | gmann: unfortunately, no :( | |
| 13:14:59 | mriedem | you'd have to use the cinder fixture for one thing | |
| 13:15:06 | pooja_jadhav | gmann: can u plz tell me.. which existing json.tpl should I use to create a BFV instance?? | |
| 13:15:22 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/85b36cd2f82ccd740057c1bee08fc722209604ab/nova/tests/functional/api_sample_tests/api_samples/servers/v2.42/server-create-req.json.tpl isn't going to work since the cinder fixture doesn't create volumes | |
| 13:15:59 | gmann | i suggest to write funtional test for that instead of sample tests | |
| 13:16:02 | mriedem | see how https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/85b36cd2f82ccd740057c1bee08fc722209604ab/nova/tests/fixtures.py#L1583 is used in functional tests | |
| 13:16:17 | mriedem | e.g. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/608771/ | |
| 13:21:30 | Luzi | hey Nova, we've written the Spec for Image Encryption for Nova and would appreciate reviews :) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/608696/ | |
| 13:21:53 | pooja_jadhav | mriedem, gmann: thanks will look into this | |
| 13:22:13 | gmann | mriedem: yeah, pooja_jadhav tried to add the create volumes stub there | |
| 13:22:13 | jangutter | sean-k-mooney, jaypipes: I'm looking at https://github.com/openstack/os-vif/blob/master/os_vif/objects/host_info.py and I've got some questions. (will post them to the room in general) | |
| 13:22:32 | sean-k-mooney | jangutter: sure go for it | |
| 13:22:40 | jaypipes | I blame sean-k-mooney. | |
| 13:22:48 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: I wonder if we should be setting 'model' here for SR-IOV VIFs? https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/6bf11e1dc14afad78b11d980c2544a3dc41579ff/nova/virt/libvirt/vif.py#L130-L133 | |
| 13:23:05 | gmann | pooja_jadhav: mriedem i feel normal functional tests make more sense to verify the compute_utils. is_volume_backed instead of api sample tests | |
| 13:23:15 | gmann | like example mriedem mentioned | |
| 13:23:18 | jangutter | for the host_info objects, there's a mechanism to filter vif types by name and version, but not a corresponding mechanism for port_profiles. | |
| 13:23:23 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove the caching the resource on Request object https://review.openstack.org/609403 | |
| 13:23:51 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove more code related to extensions and testing https://review.openstack.org/607088 | |
| 13:23:59 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin sorry taught that message was from jangutter am in what context | |
| 13:24:02 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove the extensions framework from wsgi.py https://review.openstack.org/607092 | |
| 13:24:03 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: If we do and that hw_vif_model==virtio, we'll undo the hard work of https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/622ebf2fab0a9bf75ee12437bef28f60e083f849 right? | |
| 13:24:21 | openstackgerrit | Yikun Jiang proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Support initial allocation ratios https://review.openstack.org/552105 | |
| 13:24:31 | sean-k-mooney | jangutter: yes currently nothing uses the filter. it was there for future use but its still in the future | |
| 13:24:42 | sean-k-mooney | jangutter: so we can extend it | |
| 13:24:57 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: Heh, yeah, two people talking about related stuff is confusing :) I'll test this myself in a bit. Just sanity checking | |
| 13:25:29 | gmann | alex_xu: mriedem melwitt this complete the API extensions merge work - https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/api-extensions-merge-stein+status:open | |
| 13:25:40 | mriedem | pooja_jadhav: gmann: i'm not sure why we need a new functional test for bfv? | |
| 13:25:45 | sean-k-mooney | well if you set hw_vif_model=Anything we shoudl respect that | |
| 13:25:50 | mriedem | we have existing functional tests that cover that flow | |
| 13:25:54 | mriedem | including the patch i just linked to you | |
| 13:26:00 | gmann | i will check the gate if any tests i need to fix otherwise it is good to go | |
| 13:26:09 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: but i need to check both patches to see how they interact | |
| 13:26:27 | mriedem | gmann: ack on the api extension merge series - if you haven't, you should queue that up in a runway | |
| 13:26:29 | jangutter | sean-k-mooney, jaypipes: (host_info context) right, so there's two ways of doing a check like this. the 'naive bayes' way, or the really explode the dependencies way. | |
| 13:26:41 | gmann | mriedem: right, those should work untill pooja_jadhav trying anything special or new feature (that is not up for review so not sure) | |
| 13:26:55 | pooja_jadhav | mriedem: I am writting in api-sample-test for (if instance is BFV, then local_gb_used should be 0 in in the simple tenant usage api) | |
| 13:27:20 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: if your asking should we remove https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/6bf11e1dc14afad78b11d980c2544a3dc41579ff/nova/virt/libvirt/vif.py#L130-L133 the answer is no but we may need to adapt the queue size patch | |
| 13:27:34 | pooja_jadhav | mriedem, gmann : https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1715570 | |
| 13:27:34 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1715570 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "simple tenant usage api calculating disk usages incorrectly" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Bhagyashri Shewale (bhagyashri-shewale) | |
| 13:27:40 | jangutter | sean-k-mooney, jaypipes: (host_info context) the difference comes in, are you going to ever worry about a case where VIFobject 1.0 supports PortProfile 1.0 and not 2.0? | |
| 13:27:42 | jaypipes | jangutter: the host_info should be able to communicate to Neutron's agents exactly the kinds of VIFs that it can plug. If that means we need to pass some additional information about port profiles supported by the host, so be it. | |
| 13:28:10 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: we should but we dont currently | |
| 13:28:15 | gmann | mriedem: added | |
| 13:28:19 | jaypipes | jangutter: if that makes a difference to what Neutron negotiates with the host, then yes... | |
| 13:29:17 | jangutter | jaypipes: (host_info context) it's similar to the question: does the base object need to bump its version if any of the members bump up a version? | |
| 13:29:46 | mriedem | pooja_jadhav: we don't need to use an api sample test for that bug | |
| 13:29:47 | sean-k-mooney | jangutter: unfortunetly no. i think it should be we do not bump for compostion | |
| 13:29:55 | jaypipes | jangutter: no | |
| 13:30:20 | mriedem | pooja_jadhav: a simple functional test which creates a volume-backed server and then queries the simple tenant usage API to assert it's showing disk usage when it shouldn't should suffice | |
| 13:30:25 | jaypipes | jangutter: but see my comment on the datapath offload port profile patch that you shouldn't be modifying the VIFPortProfileBase object like that. | |
| 13:30:26 | pooja_jadhav | mriedem: but existing tests for simple tenant usage api are in api sample tests. | |
| 13:30:38 | mriedem | pooja_jadhav: that doesn't really matter | |