Posted	Nick	Remark
#openstack-nova - 2018-10-10
15:31:39	sean-k-mooney	it used to be a huge problem in school when i would hand write things and just stop writing a word half way through and start in the middle fo the next one bacially because my hand could not keep up with my brian when writing
15:32:49	jangutter	In the past few years I've noticed that I've started to mistype things really really badly, reading back the sentence once is no longer enough for me to figure out what I messed up.
15:33:38	jangutter	Worse, it's happening to my speech too. Pretty hilarious when you realise that your words leaving your mouth and in your brain don't match up.
15:34:50	jangutter	but really, I try to spread that rumour so I can claim I actually meant "offloads" when I said "screwdriver".
15:48:49	openstackgerrit	Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Ignore hw_vif_type for direct, direct-physical vNIC types https://review.openstack.org/609460
15:49:04	stephenfin	sean-k-mooney: ^
15:57:05	openstackgerrit	Chris Friesen proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add support for emulated virtual TPM https://review.openstack.org/571111
16:00:59	openstackgerrit	Andreas Jaeger proposed openstack/nova master: Replace openSUSE experimental check with newer version https://review.openstack.org/609467
16:03:02	openstackgerrit	Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Consider nested allocations during allocation cleanup https://review.openstack.org/606050
16:03:03	openstackgerrit	Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Reject forced move with nested source allocation https://review.openstack.org/605785
16:04:55	gibi	jaypipes, mriedem, bauzas, efried: here is the rework of the force migration with nested allocation https://review.openstack.org/#/c/605785
16:05:08	gibi	and I'm leaving for today
16:05:13	bauzas	I'm done for the day, but I'll look tomorrow
16:05:20	bauzas	hah
16:09:07	sean-k-mooney	stephenfin: can you take a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/609414/ before you leave
16:09:25	stephenfin	sean-k-mooney: Can do
16:09:51	sean-k-mooney	master is currently broken for hardware offloaded ovs and some other cases this will fix it and harden up the interface a little
16:26:38	stephenfin	sean-k-mooney: Yeah, good spot
16:27:53	sean-k-mooney	stephenfin: lennyb spotted it and pingged rodlfo and i on the neutron irc this morning
16:28:23	sean-k-mooney	i was thinking about fixing the name spaceing of those module too but i think there is already enough in one patch
16:28:32	sean-k-mooney	i might submit a followup later
16:28:35	stephenfin	sean-k-mooney: I'm going to see if we can do the same thing claudiub did here to avoid that happening again https://review.openstack.org/#/c/470775/
16:29:30	sean-k-mooney	stephenfin: im not sure that would have help in this case but i might not under stand awhat that dose enough either
16:30:28	stephenfin	sean-k-mooney: Yeah, it wouldn't actually. I thought https://review.openstack.org/#/c/609414/1/os_vif/tests/unit/internal/command/ip/windows/test_impl_netifaces.py was mocking the wrong stuff but it's not
16:31:02	sean-k-mooney	this is the improtant test https://review.openstack.org/#/c/609414/1/os_vif/tests/unit/internal/command/ip/test_api.py
16:31:26	sean-k-mooney	before we were returing an instance of the ip lib for windows and the module for linux
16:31:43	stephenfin	sean-k-mooney: Just left a nit comment on that, actually
16:32:33	mriedem	dansmith: on that initial allocation ratios spec, there is one place we still use the compute node fields, and that's in the scheduler https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/6bf11e1dc14afad78b11d980c2544a3dc41579ff/nova/scheduler/host_manager.py#L256
16:32:46	sean-k-mooney	ya i realsied i coudl have used that too. im going to be adding more unit tests wehn ir change the module layout so ill change that then if your ok with that
16:32:51	mriedem	so we set the values on the compute (in the RT) and then read in the scheduler
16:33:00	dansmith	mriedem: but aren't those just for the filters?
16:33:04	dansmith	what else cares about those?
16:33:28	mriedem	weighers use it too i guess
16:33:46	dansmith	to pick things that aren't set for oversubscription?
16:33:49	dansmith	that seems weird
16:34:11	mriedem	the numa topology filter is also using it
16:34:12	dansmith	oh, numa filter uses it
16:34:18	dansmith	hah
16:34:24	dansmith	christ
16:34:37	dansmith	so
16:34:43	dansmith	(a) we should try to get someone to fix that
16:35:02	stephenfin	sean-k-mooney: Yup, it's just a nit
16:35:02	dansmith	(b) we can just update the compute node record with the same policy as we update placement
16:35:28	mriedem	which is use config if set
16:35:35	mriedem	that's what the spec proposed yeah
16:35:39	dansmith	yep
16:35:44	dansmith	okay I see the use in the weigher
16:35:48	mriedem	the question was about upgrading from compute nodes that have 0.0 values in the db
16:36:01	mriedem	and i said we could online data migrate those by reading config if the values are 0.0
16:36:13	dansmith	the 0.0 means that scheduler uses its own config, right?
16:36:26	sean-k-mooney	regarding the numa topology filter im not sure it actully need the allocation ratiors
16:36:27	mriedem	no
16:36:43	dansmith	allocation_ratio of zero makes no sense otherwise right?
16:36:47	mriedem	nothing in the scheduler reads config for allocation ratios
16:36:58	dansmith	mriedem: it used to though yeah?
16:37:04	mriedem	in the long long ago i guess,
16:37:07	mriedem	oh well,
16:37:12	mriedem	the facade would i guess yeah...
16:37:30	dansmith	point being, 0.0 is nonsense
16:37:30	mriedem	the ComputeNode._from_db_object would read from config if 0.0 in the db
16:37:38	jaypipes	dansmith: ++
16:37:55	dansmith	so we could leave that, and only set it if they override per compute.. same logic as placement
16:38:05	dansmith	and anything existing with 0.0 gets the same treatment as usual I guess
16:38:26	mriedem	leave the facade in ComputeNode._from_db_object?
16:38:49	dansmith	i imagine it won't affect compute's use if it is ignoring what is set on the object, so .. sure?
16:38:58	sean-k-mooney	stephenfin: for https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/0163b9bfb54aaa89b0574c86e7fd36321eebccfe/nova/scheduler/filters/numa_topology_filter.py#L91-L102 can you think of a use case wehre we actully need the allcoation ratiios here
16:39:33	sean-k-mooney	stephenfin: we are not allowed to over subsibe against our selves wehn fitting to a host so setting them to 1.0 i think would be valid
16:42:05	sean-k-mooney	stephenfin: i would have to go through the code to check but i think we could make the numa topolgy filter work without them.
16:42:50	sean-k-mooney	dansmith: although it sound like we dont need to remove them if we go wtih the facade right
16:43:14	dansmith	sean-k-mooney: it won't be right if you do
16:43:32	dansmith	sean-k-mooney: because if people set the ratio in placement per-compute, which is what we're trying to enable with all of this work,
16:43:38	dansmith	the filter will consider a value other than what is in placement
16:44:04	dansmith	I'm guessing we don't get back ratios in /a_c, but if we did, we could update our host states before we call the filters
16:44:12	sean-k-mooney	dansmith: yes but this is not using the placement value anyway
16:44:18	jaypipes	mriedem: why would we keep the facade stuff in ComputeNode._from_db_object()?
16:44:38	dansmith	sean-k-mooney: right but right now they have to be the same
16:44:39	dansmith	sean-k-mooney: in the future they will not be
16:44:52	dansmith	jaypipes: see the discussion just now on the filters that use it, and existing computes in the db with 0.0 set
16:45:21	mriedem	jaypipes: we either need to leave that or online data migrate the 0.0 entries from existing records in the db on read
16:45:21	sean-k-mooney	dansmith: placement woudl have already filtered out any host that did not pass its allocation right. so we should not have to check twice and sicne we can oversubsibe againat ourselve an allocation ration of 1 i think would still be correct
16:45:46	sean-k-mooney	dansmith: anywway its not important right now i guess
16:45:49	mriedem	jaypipes: because the compute won't deal with those fields on the object, and if not set, the scheduler reads them from config via the facade
16:45:55	dansmith	sean-k-mooney: I didn't look to see what that code in the filter was doing, so maybe?
16:46:00	dansmith	sean-k-mooney: if so, we just remove it right?
16:46:43	sean-k-mooney	dansmith: ya i think soo but i would have to double check the hardware.numa_fit_instance_to_host fucntion first
16:47:28	dansmith	we get back the resource summaries from the providers in /a_c, so including the allocation_ratios in there might be useful for things like this and for the weigher case
16:48:30	sean-k-mooney	dansmith: ya. the filters dont currently have access to the allocation candiates today is that correct
16:48:39	sean-k-mooney	unless there in the spec_objec?
16:48:42	dansmith	sean-k-mooney: that isn't what I'm saying
16:49:01	dansmith	I'm saying the scheduler, when it gets back candidates, gets a summary of all covered providers, with inventory information
16:49:11	dansmith	if that included the ratios, it could update host_states before calling the filter loop
16:49:46	jaypipes	sean-k-mooney: pls see my comment on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/609414/
16:49:59	sean-k-mooney	oh ok that would work too ya i was assuming you were suggsting passing in the candiates but your way we do that update once and dont have to update any code in the filters
16:50:52	sean-k-mooney	jaypipes: there isnt a bug number because i just got pingged on irc this morning but i can open one
16:51:11	dansmith	mriedem: melwitt tssurya: cells meeting today?
16:51:17	mriedem	nack
16:51:24	mriedem	we might want to just cancel that meeting
16:51:39	dansmith	I'd also be fine with that
16:51:50	dansmith	I think I suggested that last year even
16:53:39	jaypipes	sean-k-mooney: yes pls. if this is truly a "currently broken for hardware offloaded ovs" scenario, it definitely should be a bug.

Earlier   Later