Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2019-05-30
08:45:14 johnthetubaguy lyarwood: I was dubious about that being back-portable but you are right, we should have done this in the first place
08:46:33 lyarwood johnthetubaguy: yup it's just yet another swap_volume bugfix IMHO, pretty large for the stable branches but still useful.
08:47:04 johnthetubaguy yeah, its borderline, but too useful not to
09:33:35 sean-k-mooney johnthetubaguy: o/
09:33:49 johnthetubaguy hey
09:34:27 sean-k-mooney johnthetubaguy: can you let me know if you want me to do the refactor you suggested here https://review.opendev.org/#/c/647733/5/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py@4833 ill try to respin that later todoay if you do
09:34:56 sean-k-mooney ill add the extra unit tests in either case
09:35:46 johnthetubaguy sean-k-mooney: its probably overkill, that was me thinking out loud really, just looking at your comments on there now
09:37:08 sean-k-mooney johnthetubaguy: ok, i dont like that the fucntion is modifying its inputs but i also dont really want to make the change larger then it needs to be
09:37:54 johnthetubaguy sean-k-mooney: yeah, also I think local consistency is a good argument to keep it as it is
09:38:04 sean-k-mooney if your happy with the other responces ill just add the extra unit test cases and leave it as is.
09:38:21 johnthetubaguy yeah, I am happy with that
09:38:31 sean-k-mooney cool thanks for taking a look :)
09:39:48 johnthetubaguy no worries
09:59:22 openstackgerrit Hamdy Khader proposed openstack/os-vif master: OVS DPDK port representors support https://review.opendev.org/658786
10:08:49 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: nova-lvm: Disable [validation]/run_validation in tempest.conf https://review.opendev.org/662176
10:13:20 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova stable/queens: Delete allocations even if _confirm_resize raises https://review.opendev.org/652153
10:18:21 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova stable/rocky: docs: Don't version links to reno docs https://review.opendev.org/662178
10:41:25 openstackgerrit Adam Spiers proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Provide HW_CPU_X86_AMD_SEV trait when SEV is supported https://review.opendev.org/638680
10:46:04 openstackgerrit Adam Spiers proposed openstack/nova master: Track inventory for new MEM_ENCRYPTION_CONTEXT resource class https://review.opendev.org/662105
10:49:24 openstackgerrit Adam Spiers proposed openstack/nova master: Extract SEV-specific bits on host detection https://review.opendev.org/636334
11:02:19 alex_xu sean-k-mooney: good morning, hope you can take a look at this https://review.opendev.org/#/c/601596/ if you are interesting. we update according the PTG discussion
11:08:53 sean-k-mooney sure ill take a look
11:09:00 johnthetubaguy alex_xu: I keep meaning to re-review that too
11:09:21 sean-k-mooney ill be submiting a spec for stactic CAT today or tommorow if your interested too
11:10:38 sean-k-mooney alex_xu: well assumeing we have capasity to work on it this cycle which is still TBD but im hoping to answer that question today
11:11:20 alex_xu johnthetubaguy: sean-k-mooney thanks!
11:20:36 gibi efried: could you check https://review.opendev.org/#/c/652608/ mriedem already happy with it
11:23:14 openstackgerrit Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/stein: cleanup evacuated instances not on hypervisor https://review.opendev.org/662189
11:34:43 alex_xu sean-k-mooney: yea, i'm interesting in review the cat spec, I will ask someone from my team review it also
11:37:26 sean-k-mooney alex_xu: the draft is here https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/libvirt-static-cache-and-memory-allocation but its best to keep most of the review for gerrit
11:38:12 sean-k-mooney i still have some todos and self notes to clean up but its mostly complete
11:38:13 alex_xu sean-k-mooney: nice, yea, will waiting for the gerrit
11:58:51 openstackgerrit Hamdy Khader proposed openstack/os-vif master: OVS DPDK port representors support https://review.opendev.org/658786
12:17:34 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: block_device: Optionally recreate attachments when refreshing connection_info https://review.opendev.org/579004
12:55:36 efried gibi: reading...
12:58:09 efried gibi: This second use case...
12:59:07 efried So if I had a pre-Stein instance with bandwidth request, it didn't have any bandwidth allocated in placement. Once this is implemented, I can fix up that instance, giving it appropriate allocations, by migrating it.
12:59:09 efried do I have that right?
13:06:13 sean-k-mooney presumable a rebuild could fix it too?
13:06:41 sean-k-mooney but a migration or resize would be the more general case
13:07:28 efried sean-k-mooney: This spec gel for you?
13:07:34 efried https://review.opendev.org/#/c/652608/
13:07:46 efried you had some earlier reviews, but no votes
13:08:12 sean-k-mooney i kind of lost track of it. but ill review it now
13:08:21 sean-k-mooney at this point its proably fine
13:09:28 efried thanks
13:09:33 gibi efried: yes, migration will heal the allocation on the target host
13:09:41 efried thanks
13:10:01 gibi efried: sometimes there is no way to heal the allocation locally
13:10:32 efried The spec looks fine to me, though I only superficially understand some of the mechanics involved, so I'll wait for sean-k-mooney's nod, then I'll approve.
13:10:36 gibi efried: e.g. resource is overallocated as there was no nova support to keep it in sync
13:10:48 efried right, that makes sense. So the CLI will fail?
13:11:11 gibi efried: yes the heal_allocation CLI could fail due to overallocation
13:11:31 gibi as placement would reject the new allocation being created
13:11:43 efried yup, I get it.
13:12:15 efried And the overallocation was possible because nobody anywhere was tracking bw quantities
13:12:21 shilpasd efried: Hi, need discussion regarding 'forbidden aggregate specs'
13:12:26 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova stable/rocky: Fix retry of instance_update_and_get_original https://review.opendev.org/659318
13:12:31 efried shilpasd: Sure, what's up?
13:12:35 shilpasd here at https://review.opendev.org/#/c/609960/8/specs/train/approved/placement-req-filter-forbidden-aggregates.rst@203
13:12:37 efried shilpasd: Are you implementing it?
13:12:49 shilpasd yes
13:12:50 gibi efried: yes, there was no resource tracking
13:13:33 shilpasd efried: We have added code to sync traits set on aggregates for command "nova-manage placement sync_aggregates".
13:14:24 efried okay
13:15:06 shilpasd efried: further observed that 'syncing of traits set on aggregate is required for the other scenarios' like aggregate-create/delete/aggregate-remove-host/aggregate-set-metadata
13:15:18 efried yes, that makes sense to me.
13:15:52 efried though I'm not sure what we should do on delete or remove-host ...
13:16:52 efried perhaps we need a --flush-traits option of some sort, so the admin can choose.
13:17:09 shilpasd efried: for delete, will remove entry from placement.placement_aggregates and for remove-host will remove host association from aggragte
13:17:43 efried right, but the question is whether you should remove the aggregate's listed traits from the compute node resource providers in that aggregate
13:18:11 efried answer is probably: "it depends" :\
13:18:45 sean-k-mooney efried: gibi three minor nits but yep that looks good to me
13:19:33 efried shilpasd: This would probably be a good topic for the ML.
13:19:54 efried gibi: I +2ed. The spelling nits probably aren't worth fixing, want me to merge?
13:21:17 sean-k-mooney i would eihter fix them and fast approve or just merge it as the content is correct modulo a few typos
13:22:34 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add heal_instance_mappings command https://review.opendev.org/655908
13:22:50 gibi efried: merge it please
13:22:58 gibi thanks
13:23:06 efried gibi: done
13:23:14 gibi awesome
13:23:26 efried shilpasd: I suppose another option is to namespace the traits to be used for this feature.
13:24:46 efried shilpasd: e.g. if trait name contains '_AGGREGATE_ISOLATION_', automatically remove it when the agg is deleted or the host is removed. (Unless of course the host belongs to *another* aggregate which still has that trait...)
13:26:13 efried gibi: assume this is for train, yah?
13:26:23 efried (gibi: I'm doing the bp paperwork)
13:26:24 gibi efried: yes, it is for train
13:26:34 efried k
13:26:56 gibi I have couple of patches up already but more work is needed there which i will do in the coming days weeks
13:29:07 efried gibi: are the patches tracked against this bp? The "Implementation" is not showing as started.
13:29:25 gibi efried: I guess the bp rename did not helped
13:29:25 shilpasd efried: aggregate can have any trait and that we need to be sync with placement, irrespective of namespace, right?
13:29:30 gibi efried: let me fix it
13:29:39 efried (I could go look, but I'm being lazy, aka doing a bunch of other things at the same time)
13:30:08 efried shilpasd: When you create an aggregate or add a host, I would say yes, you should add all the traits.
13:30:20 efried shilpasd: I'm just trying to come up with a way to handle *deletion*.
13:30:33 shilpasd efried: understood, okay
13:30:53 efried shilpasd: For example, if you're creating an aggregate to isolate your hosts that have HW_CPU_X86_AVX, it makes zero sense to remove that trait if you destroy that aggregate.
13:30:53 gibi efried: I guess the implementation status will be updated if I push a new patch up targeting the renamed bp
13:31:10 efried gibi: yeah, it's totally no big deal, I really don't care, just happened to notice.

Earlier   Later