Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2018-12-14
16:51:58 mriedem thank you
16:53:23 openstackgerrit Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Ensure that bandwidth and VF are from the same PF https://review.openstack.org/623543
16:53:23 openstackgerrit Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Record requester in the InstancePCIRequest https://review.openstack.org/625310
16:53:24 openstackgerrit Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Add pf_interface_name tag to passthrough_whitelist https://review.openstack.org/625311
16:56:02 mriedem dansmith: i think you will very much enjoy this bug fix while you're here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/619061/
16:56:03 mriedem fixes the pg job,
16:56:10 mriedem should improve our cell mapping query by project_id code
16:56:25 mriedem signed off by zzzeek himself
16:56:26 melwitt mriedem, dansmith: should we... adjust the spec deadline because of the holidays? it kinda sucks that there's so much unactionable time between now and the deadline
16:56:31 dansmith mriedem: I think you very much don't know what I enjoy, apparently
16:56:51 mriedem dansmith: oh but there is stuff about camping and dirty cartoons in it
16:56:56 dansmith melwitt: the holidays come the same time every year, so I don't think this is much of a surprise
16:56:58 dansmith mriedem: ORLY
16:57:29 melwitt I don't think it's a surprise, but anyway, was just a thought
16:57:31 mriedem melwitt: i say leave it - people have plenty of actionable time for months leading up to the freeze
16:57:31 dansmith melwitt: and we've had a lot of time open for spec review, I'm not sure that extending the deadline is going to change that
16:58:10 melwitt ok, fair enough
16:58:29 mriedem melwitt: what you could do is sort out what from the bucket is stuff we should actually focus on before the freeze, and then get that out to the ML
16:58:52 mriedem because there is likely lots of cruft, but a few that just need another +2 or are things we should focus on in stein yet
16:58:55 dansmith melwitt: sorry I should have thrown a smiley on the end of that.. meant to sound snarky, not dickly :)
16:59:06 dansmith mriedem: ++
16:59:21 dansmith help focus the last week of reviews in jan
16:59:25 mriedem at this point i'm mostly looking to get the amd sev and jan's thing in
16:59:33 mriedem i mean for things i'm actively reviewing
16:59:39 melwitt ok, that's good feedback. I'll do that
16:59:53 mriedem there are a couple of other specs that have had lots of review and just need a push over the line
17:01:17 kashyap Heay folks, so I was reading the scrollback here. I have posted a "simple thing" -- https://review.openstack.org/#/c/625216/ (libvirt: Support native TLS for migration and disks over NBD)
17:01:41 kashyap See the commit message (I spent full 2 hours fiddling with it) for the "essay" :D
17:02:30 mriedem doesn't sound simple
17:02:37 melwitt that looks like that should be at least a blueprint, if not a spec
17:02:37 kashyap :-)
17:02:44 mriedem live migration + tls + anything = doom
17:02:59 kashyap Truer words were never said
17:03:05 mriedem "oh you're on/not on shared storage and/or volume-backed? sorry!"
17:03:25 kashyap mriedem: Ha! _That_ is what is fixed
17:03:40 kashyap This whole week I (almost) singuarly focused on it
17:03:52 kashyap Even wrote this detailed doc, with a start, middle, and an end: https://kashyapc.fedorapeople.org/Native-TLS/Setup-for-NBD-and-migration-streams-over-TLS.rst.txt
17:04:06 kashyap You can do a "TLS journey" if you follow that doc with concentration and focus.
17:04:19 mriedem can i do *anything* else?
17:04:25 kashyap What more ... I even have evidence files (yet to upload) that shows precisely what to find :D
17:04:46 kashyap mriedem: You are free to do anything you fancy. You know that
17:04:47 mriedem i'm just joking of course
17:04:47 kashyap :D
17:05:01 mriedem i'm real fucking huggy today
17:05:10 kashyap I see mriedem is giving free hugs all around
17:05:29 kashyap mriedem: See -- you didn't take up my offer to get you that drink (damned if I'll remember the name) you wanted
17:05:40 kashyap But _of course_ ... when you're with SO in Europe
17:05:44 mriedem root beer
17:05:56 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Migrate upgrade checks to oslo.upgradecheck https://review.openstack.org/603499
17:05:59 kashyap Not even the last thing you want to do is hang out with me :D
17:06:01 mriedem or "rooted beer" as an EU might call it
17:06:09 kashyap Ah, yes.
17:06:49 kashyap mriedem: So the nice thing is that: now Nova guests can have encryption (*without* the penalty of "libvirtd tunnelling") for all migration streams
17:07:06 kashyap Namely: Instance guest RAM, device state + disks over NDB
17:07:36 kashyap And goes to upload his "evidence files"
17:08:29 kashyap Oh ... the fly in the ointment is I'll be on PTO next week (if I don't take them, they'll disappear). So only be back in 1st week of Jan to come back to write tests
17:09:03 kashyap So ... saying: "No, you wretch, I will not even click on the URL without tests" is perfectly reasonable
17:09:58 mriedem i seem to remember something about nbd + the tunneling thing years ago from danpb
17:10:01 mriedem but it's very hazy now
17:10:07 mriedem or maybe it was markmc
17:10:08 mriedem idk
17:10:43 kashyap mriedem_lunch: When you get back from lunch, as of today:
17:11:03 kashyap - Nova has 'live_migration_tunnelled' -- but if you use that, you can't do "block migration"
17:11:23 kashyap That is one of the major cases we fix. Thus, having encryption for all streams
17:12:09 kashyap (By "streams", migration stream + NBD stream)
17:13:22 kashyap And going forward, we will deprecate the 'live_migration_tunnelled', because it has _awful_ performance impact and latency
17:13:53 kashyap As there'll be no compelling reason to use it.
17:14:13 kashyap melwitt: Hi, forgot to address your comment
17:14:52 kashyap melwitt: I _thought_ I posted a spec, but only settled with "bug", as it's technically a "bug": https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1798796
17:14:52 openstack Launchpad bug 1798796 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "libvirt: Use VIR_MIGRATE_TLS to get QEMU's native TLS support for migration and NBD" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Kashyap Chamarthy (kashyapc)
17:15:35 kashyap But, I know what you mean.
17:15:54 melwitt calling that a bug is a stretch IMO, if you need a commit message that long and at least a certain version of QEMU etc
17:16:21 melwitt but maybe that's just me
17:16:31 kashyap No, you're fully right. Given the length of the commit message
17:16:38 kashyap I might as well just put it in a spec
17:17:04 kashyap What do you suggest: a spec-less Blueprint, or a spec?
17:17:37 melwitt I usually say, start with a specless blueprint (you need a blueprint either way) and then usually we discuss in the nova meeting and decide whether a spec is needed
17:17:41 dansmith I agree with melwitt, and I think it's a spec given the commit message is already nearly a spec
17:17:55 dansmith well, I agree with melwitt as of 30s ago :P
17:17:59 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add workaround to cleanup instance dir when using rbd https://review.openstack.org/618478
17:18:20 kashyap dansmith: Okido. As you know, I'm not averse to (efficient and useful!) words
17:18:31 kashyap Sorry for being a lazy pig and not writing it until the last moment
17:18:37 dansmith in said meeting, I would just say "if you need a spec in the commit message it should probably be a spec" :)
17:18:38 kashyap I accept any penalty you may incur on me.
17:18:53 kashyap dansmith: No...that's too quippy
17:19:45 kashyap Okay, before the my brain cache gets flushed, might as well just do it. Here we go.
17:19:56 melwitt heh. well, true if it were specless it would have to be like, literally the commit message was enough to explain it and no one had further questions and no additional details were needed
17:20:09 melwitt which is unlikely
17:20:24 kashyap melwitt: Did you read the commit message? :-)
17:20:24 dansmith the code is really simple,
17:20:54 dansmith so it seems overkill for a spec, but the commit message is long, and there's apparently another tome of reference material from kashyap
17:20:56 dansmith so I dunno
17:20:57 kashyap Yeah, except the part about _which_ of the 4 flags go together, and _which_ I shold not mix
17:21:24 melwitt kashyap: yes :) it is a mini spec
17:21:29 kashyap dansmith: From enabling point of view, it's straight-forward
17:21:31 kashyap melwitt: LOL
17:21:59 kashyap Yeah, I spent a whole 2 hours to write. I'm a slow-as-molasses with writing down thoghts
17:22:06 dansmith so i could be maybe persuaded that it should just be a BP, if the commit message was trimmed down to non-kashyap standards and the patch included docs changes to explain what the commit message is
17:22:12 melwitt another advantage of the spec is it goes into our docs as nice reference place
17:22:40 dansmith yes, the commit message is documenting usage, which isn't right, IMHO

Earlier   Later