| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2019-07-17 | |||
| 20:13:29 | artom | And with that perfect timing, it's daycare time | |
| 20:16:24 | efried_rollin | stephenfin, sean-k-mooney: what do you mean, report them as both VCPU and PCPU? Won't that lead to double the real inventory? | |
| 20:17:21 | efried_rollin | artom: don't forget pysnooper | |
| 21:20:45 | efried | dansmith: deployers can implement their own filters, right? | |
| 21:20:56 | dansmith | efried: scheduler filters? | |
| 21:20:59 | efried | yeah | |
| 21:21:45 | efried | dansmith: that live on the compute and get the option to say "this host is no good for this instance" | |
| 21:22:12 | dansmith | efried: live on the compute? | |
| 21:22:22 | efried | do they not live on the compute? They live on the scheduler? | |
| 21:22:30 | dansmith | but yeah, scheduler filters are the only real plug point we offer | |
| 21:22:41 | dansmith | efried: scheduler filters? yeah they live on the ... scheduler :) | |
| 21:23:07 | efried | dansmith: So the NUMATopologyFilter lives on the scheduler despite needing to know very specific things about the NUMA topology of the host it's filtering for? | |
| 21:23:55 | efried | (recognizing that one is an us-provided filter, that does things beyond just binarily saying yea or nay to a host) | |
| 21:24:45 | dansmith | efried: yeah, that's kinda the whole point | |
| 21:25:09 | efried | okay; I mean I'm just curious how the NUMATopologyFilter gets to know those things about the hosts | |
| 21:25:11 | dansmith | I'm not even sure how you're thinking things would/could be working with them on the compute | |
| 21:25:29 | dansmith | but the compute and virt driver expose a generalized model so the scheduler can operate on an abstraction, because not all clouds have all the same hypervisors, versions of hypervisors, etc | |
| 21:25:37 | efried | I guess the compute service comes up and detects the topology and reports it back to the scheduler or puts it in the database or something. | |
| 21:25:42 | dansmith | efried: they expose a generalized model | |
| 21:34:04 | efried | dansmith: thanks. I posted answers to your comments on the providers.yaml spec. LMK if you want to discuss (since Dakshina doesn't really seem to do IRC ): | |
| 21:34:25 | dansmith | ack, it'll be tomorrow | |
| 21:34:42 | efried | thanks | |
| 23:30:04 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Add Python 3 Train unit tests https://review.opendev.org/669439 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2019-07-18 | |||
| 00:26:59 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP-until-series-is-ready] Introduce live_migration_claim() https://review.opendev.org/635669 | |
| 00:27:00 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: New objects for NUMA live migration https://review.opendev.org/634827 | |
| 00:27:00 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: LM: add support for sending NUMAMigrateData to the source https://review.opendev.org/634828 | |
| 00:27:01 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: LM: add support for updating NUMA-related XML on the source https://review.opendev.org/635229 | |
| 00:27:01 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: RPC changes to prepare for NUMA live migration https://review.opendev.org/634605 | |
| 00:27:02 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: NUMA live migration support https://review.opendev.org/634606 | |
| 00:27:03 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Deprecate CONF.workarounds.enable_numa_live_migration https://review.opendev.org/640021 | |
| 03:23:51 | openstackgerrit | Alex Xu proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Populate the existing mediated devices in the libvirt device manager https://review.opendev.org/670787 | |
| 03:23:51 | openstackgerrit | Alex Xu proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Using the claim/unclaim_for_instance for mdevs https://review.opendev.org/671222 | |
| 03:23:52 | openstackgerrit | Alex Xu proposed openstack/nova master: Add DeviceManager to the libvirt virt driver https://review.opendev.org/671388 | |
| 05:20:30 | openstackgerrit | Alex Xu proposed openstack/nova master: Populates the existing mediated devices in the libvirt device manager https://review.opendev.org/670787 | |
| 05:20:31 | openstackgerrit | Alex Xu proposed openstack/nova master: Using the claim/unclaim_for_instance for mdevs https://review.opendev.org/671222 | |
| 05:20:31 | openstackgerrit | Alex Xu proposed openstack/nova master: Adds functional test for creating the instance with vgpus https://review.opendev.org/671398 | |
| 05:22:09 | alex_xu | bauzas: ^ need your review on those patches, I move the mdev into the new claim_for_instance interface | |
| 06:30:50 | openstackgerrit | Alex Xu proposed openstack/nova master: Add DeviceManager to the libvirt virt driver https://review.opendev.org/671388 | |
| 06:30:51 | openstackgerrit | Alex Xu proposed openstack/nova master: Populates the existing mediated devices in the libvirt device manager https://review.opendev.org/670787 | |
| 06:30:51 | openstackgerrit | Alex Xu proposed openstack/nova master: Using the claim/unclaim_for_instance for mdevs https://review.opendev.org/671222 | |
| 06:30:52 | openstackgerrit | Alex Xu proposed openstack/nova master: Adds functional test for creating the instance with vgpus https://review.opendev.org/671398 | |
| 06:46:55 | openstackgerrit | Yongli He proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Microversion 2.75 - show server topology https://review.opendev.org/670790 | |
| 07:43:36 | openstackgerrit | Dakshina Ilangovan proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Spec: Provider config YAML file https://review.opendev.org/612497 | |
| 08:22:07 | stephenfin | efried: Correct. We're doing that already and we've decided it's not an issue since operators should already have separate hosts for pinned and non-pinned instances | |
| 08:23:33 | stephenfin | efried: and if they don't, they get pretty much what they had before, even if placement inventory will be kind of a lie | |
| 08:27:12 | cdent | lying is bad, mmmkay? | |
| 08:44:49 | openstackgerrit | QingFeng Hao proposed openstack/nova master: Add get_host_memory_stats in zvm driver https://review.opendev.org/671430 | |
| 08:48:46 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: left comments in https://review.opendev.org/#/c/671338 overall direction looks good to me | |
| 08:53:12 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: thanks, ya the unit test failures are valid i ran them locally with a regex of things i tought might break but i obviously missed some | |
| 09:26:35 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: tox: Keeping going with docs https://review.opendev.org/670332 | |
| 09:26:52 | kashyap | Heya, a random question: what else tooling do people use besides `git-review` to make life pleasant with Gerrit? | |
| 09:27:25 | kashyap | (I'm asking because, I'm providing a data point for those who are mailing lists, and are considering web-based workflows, GitLab/GitHub; not Gerrit at this point) | |
| 09:27:45 | kashyap | I think `gertty` would be another for those who like the offline caching and terminal-based reviews | |
| 09:29:44 | sean-k-mooney | its mainly git review for me. with web for review. i strongly dislike mailing list based workflows to the point that unless that project also has patchwork i almost entirly avoid them | |
| 09:29:59 | sean-k-mooney | at least when it comes to code reviews | |
| 09:30:06 | sean-k-mooney | gertty if fine for reviewing | |
| 09:30:35 | sean-k-mooney | but its offline asspect comes at the cost that it needs to build up an sql database of the open changes | |
| 09:30:45 | sean-k-mooney | that can be slow with large repos like nova | |
| 09:31:15 | gibi | efried: I added comments to https://review.opendev.org/#/c/612497 | |
| 09:31:39 | kashyap | I maintain Gertty in Fedora, FWIW, because I enjoy the offline ability. And the DB build-up is a negligible cost | |
| 09:31:50 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: It's not SQL; but Berkely | |
| 09:32:07 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: no is sqlight3 | |
| 09:32:11 | kashyap | Ah, right | |
| 09:32:13 | kashyap | Sorry | |
| 09:33:52 | sean-k-mooney | there are allo tools like https://github.com/openstack-infra/git-restack or https://github.com/dhellmann/git-nit | |
| 09:34:28 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Thanks; /me checks | |
| 09:34:56 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: personally i find mailing list much slower and harder to follow since you have to constuct all that tooling yourself | |
| 09:34:58 | kashyap | Ah, didn't know of them | |
| 09:35:40 | sean-k-mooney | git restack is old and not really uses much i think | |
| 09:36:31 | sean-k-mooney | personally i found doing a interactive rebase manullay to the same base commit was just as quick | |
| 09:36:59 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Nod. (But the kernel and other systems folks still maintain mailing lists are the "best way" to manage large projects as kernel: https://lwn.net/Articles/702177/) | |
| 09:37:12 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Okay, thanks for the opinion and notes :-) | |
| 09:39:59 | bauzas | alex_xu: ack, will look | |
| 09:40:08 | alex_xu | bauzas: thanks | |
| 09:42:43 | bauzas | alex_xu: wow, that's a massive refactoring, I'll do this this afternoon | |
| 09:42:48 | bauzas | thanks for it | |
| 09:43:06 | bauzas | alex_xu: FWIW, I'm also working on https://review.opendev.org/#/c/589085/ | |
| 09:43:59 | alex_xu | bauzas: I guess it should works with your patch also, and you get the vgpu claim for dst host | |
| 09:44:23 | bauzas | alex_xu: that's why I need to look at your series to exactly understand how it works | |
| 09:46:06 | bauzas | alex_xu: also, a nit, I wonder if we should have a specless bp for this | |
| 09:46:35 | alex_xu | bauzas: yea, probably we can ask efried about that | |
| 10:28:33 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: bindep: Remove dead markers https://review.opendev.org/671452 | |
| 10:30:25 | stephenfin | bauzas, alex_xu: Easiest +2 you'll ever have right here https://review.opendev.org/671452 | |
| 10:30:44 | bauzas | stephenfin: hands on deck | |
| 11:06:16 | kashyap | bauzas: Isn't it simple enough to just go ahead and +W it? | |
| 11:06:44 | kashyap | (It being the 'bindep' one) | |
| 11:06:48 | bauzas | no | |
| 11:07:08 | bauzas | fast-approval seems right, but honestly people could have concerns | |
| 11:08:11 | kashyap | If there _can_ be concerns, okay, fair enough. | |
| 11:08:20 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: even if it was stephenfin wrote it so we shoul dnot have a redhat core +2+w without someone else looking at it | |
| 11:08:58 | kashyap | Well, not that asinine reason again. There are sensible exceptions | |
| 11:09:10 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: yep this is not one of them | |
| 11:09:22 | kashyap | On that point, see my extended point here: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-May/006080.html | |
| 11:09:28 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Okay. | |
| 11:09:49 | kashyap | I don't care about this change particularly, BTW. Just the simplicity of it is what prompted me to say it. | |
| 11:18:29 | cdent | kashyap++ and *hugs* | |
| 11:18:47 | kashyap | :-) | |
| 11:22:05 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: For argument's sake, why is this not one of them? Precise is even EOL | |
| 11:22:34 | kashyap | This is definitely one of those dead-simple changes that doesn't require an completely unhinged process to interfere | |
| 11:22:43 | kashyap | Anyway, not my circus, not my clowns. | |