| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2019-07-29 | |||
| 08:02:20 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: Get rid of args to RBDDriver.__init__() https://review.opendev.org/668564 | |
| 08:02:33 | alex_xu | kashyap: referring to upstream | |
| 08:02:47 | alex_xu | intel don't have oepnstack variant | |
| 08:02:49 | kashyap | alex_xu: No, we didn't change upstream machine type - what makes you say so? | |
| 08:03:28 | kashyap | alex_xu: In that patch, for x86|i386 it is still 'pc' -- https://review.opendev.org/#/c/670189/14/nova/virt/libvirt/utils.py | |
| 08:03:31 | alex_xu | kashyap: sorry, no the upstream, the patch https://review.opendev.org/670189 changed | |
| 08:03:48 | kashyap | alex_xu: Which exactly line are you referring to? | |
| 08:04:15 | kashyap | alex_xu: Ah, hang on. | |
| 08:04:24 | kashyap | That patch was fixing a bad assumption | |
| 08:05:05 | alex_xu | kashyap: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/670189/14/nova/virt/libvirt/host.py@745 | |
| 08:05:08 | kashyap | alex_xu: The second point in the commit message only says, there is an "initiative to update to q35", but that has _not_ landed yet (not even the spec) | |
| 08:05:39 | alex_xu | emm... | |
| 08:05:51 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Remove native LUKS compat code https://review.opendev.org/669121 | |
| 08:06:02 | kashyap | alex_xu: That line (745) was only removing an assumption. It is not changing anything. | |
| 08:06:47 | alex_xu | ah.... | |
| 08:06:58 | kashyap | aspiers: When you're about, some discussion in the scrollback on that harden getDomainCapabilities() patch. | |
| 08:07:02 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova stable/queens: libvirt: flatten rbd images when unshelving an instance https://review.opendev.org/668123 | |
| 08:07:03 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova stable/queens: DNM - Test rbd unshelve fix on stable queens https://review.opendev.org/668142 | |
| 08:08:51 | tssurya | brinzhang: I have a question regarding the -1 you have https://review.opendev.org/#/c/666792/ and https://review.opendev.org/#/c/645611/, please reply whenever you have time | |
| 08:09:08 | alex_xu | kashyap: ah, I know where I missunderstand now | |
| 08:10:55 | kashyap | :-) | |
| 08:11:54 | kashyap | alex_xu: And for the record, ignore my (and yours?) "we should be explicit" on the warning about license keys -- no warning is required in this case :-) | |
| 08:12:25 | alex_xu | yes, nothing required | |
| 08:14:06 | kashyap | alex_xu: I added a summary of our discussion here, let me know if that looks good: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/670189/14 | |
| 08:14:29 | alex_xu | thanks | |
| 08:18:39 | brinzhang | tssurya: about https://review.opendev.org/#/c/666792/, beacuse of the power-update not support for the nova CLI, I donot understand why need to add this change. | |
| 08:18:54 | brinzhang | tssurya: Even if you don't add 2.75 microversion, will it affect the functionality of novaclient? | |
| 08:19:19 | tssurya | brinzhang: if I don't update the client version, I cannot use the server side changes | |
| 08:19:21 | tssurya | that | |
| 08:19:25 | tssurya | is why we update | |
| 08:19:47 | brinzhang | If it's true, I think my understanding is biased, I will remove that -1. thanks | |
| 08:20:11 | tssurya | also as you can see here: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/666792/3/novaclient/tests/unit/v2/test_shell.py@4278 , this is why we add "2.75" to the list of versions that do not need change on the client side | |
| 08:20:19 | tssurya | that is also why we have no tests | |
| 08:20:48 | tssurya | brinzhang: thanks , next time you have a question feel free to just ask without having to give a vote :) | |
| 08:21:45 | brinzhang | Yeah, because of on weekends, so... I will care :P | |
| 08:24:29 | brinzhang | tssurya: If we not add this change, it will be raise 404? or anonther? | |
| 08:27:21 | tssurya | brinzhang: https://docs.openstack.org/python-novaclient/latest/contributor/microversions.html | |
| 08:29:36 | tssurya | in my particular case (https://review.opendev.org/#/c/645611/9/nova/api/openstack/compute/server_external_events.py@72) its a schema invalidation so yes a 404 | |
| 08:30:31 | tssurya | but the main point is to bump the versions serially, like we shouldn't be doing 2.76 and just leave 2.75 on the client because it doesn't have any "code changes" | |
| 08:30:46 | tssurya | ^ its mentioned in the docs | |
| 08:31:56 | brinzhang | Yeah, I know this, I think it will be raise 406. | |
| 08:32:11 | brinzhang | { | |
| 08:32:11 | brinzhang | "computeFault":{ | |
| 08:32:11 | brinzhang | "message": "Version 2.78 is not supported by the API. Minimum is 2.1 and maximum is 2.76.", | |
| 08:32:11 | brinzhang | "code": 406 | |
| 08:32:11 | brinzhang | } | |
| 08:32:12 | brinzhang | } | |
| 08:32:44 | kashyap | alex_xu: Thank you for ACKing, much appreciated. | |
| 08:33:40 | tssurya | brinzhang: no the server supports 2.75, we are trying to make the client support it as well | |
| 08:33:59 | kashyap | stephenfin: Hi, when you're about, can you please have a gander at this: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/670189/ (libvirt: harden Host.get_domain_capabilities()) | |
| 08:34:22 | kashyap | stephenfin: Already has +2 from Alex. And it's useful for two features, one for SEV, the other for the Secure Boot thing | |
| 08:44:45 | alex_xu | kashyap: np | |
| 08:50:31 | brinzhang | tssurya: about https://review.opendev.org/#/c/645611/, replyed with comment. | |
| 09:44:35 | aspiers | kashyap: here | |
| 09:44:59 | kashyap | aspiers: Hi, go straight to my update in the Gerrit change. | |
| 09:45:07 | kashyap | aspiers: (Saves you time from reading IRC scrollback) | |
| 09:45:12 | aspiers | OK | |
| 09:46:46 | aspiers | kashyap: not sure if there's a question for me? looks like it's all clarified? | |
| 09:48:14 | kashyap | aspiers: Yeah, no more question. Was more of an FYI | |
| 09:48:28 | aspiers | kashyap: OK thanks. BTW I need your review on https://review.opendev.org/#/c/673151/ more than anyone else's :) | |
| 09:48:47 | aspiers | That ties to the scrollback I wrote on Sat | |
| 09:48:55 | kashyap | aspiers: Will do. First trying to write some code to parse getDomainCapabilities() for 'efi' bits :D | |
| 09:49:03 | openstack | bugzilla.redhat.com bug 1733940 in libvirt "getDomainCapabilities() does not report all available OVMF firmware binaries" [Unspecified,New] - Assigned to libvirt-maint | |
| 09:49:27 | kashyap | aspiers: What scrollback from Sat? I missed | |
| 09:49:48 | aspiers | http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-nova/%23openstack-nova.2019-07-27.log.html#t2019-07-27T18:15:17 | |
| 09:50:40 | kashyap | aspiers: BTW, funnily enough, I have a "vested interest" to review that patch. Why? | |
| 09:51:10 | kashyap | aspiers: ... I too have a need for domain capabilities for 'q35' for Secure Boot | |
| 09:51:24 | kashyap | (Secure Boot for KVM/QEMU _mandates_ 'q35') | |
| 09:51:40 | kashyap | aspiers: I will get to this interesting patch today. | |
| 09:52:12 | aspiers | kashyap: Yeah, this is not a huge coincidence, since SEV mandates UEFI via OVMF | |
| 09:52:33 | aspiers | lack of UEFI is probably why my SEV guests are currently unresponsive | |
| 09:53:43 | kashyap | Ah, I see | |
| 09:53:58 | kashyap | aspiers: Aside, if you don't mind holding your nose: https://kashyapc.fedorapeople.org/Create-a-SecureBoot-enabled-VM.bash | |
| 09:54:07 | aspiers | although it does not require secure boot AFAIK | |
| 09:54:23 | kashyap | Right | |
| 09:54:32 | aspiers | are there docs for UEFI boot in nova? | |
| 09:54:41 | kashyap | Afraid, not much I guess | |
| 09:54:51 | openstackgerrit | Dongcan Ye proposed openstack/nova master: Fix wrong huge pages in doc https://review.opendev.org/673252 | |
| 09:55:22 | kashyap | aspiers: Do you have a few more minutes to chat on a related topic? | |
| 09:55:32 | aspiers | yes | |
| 09:58:19 | kashyap | aspiers: So I need to parse that 'efi' bit on line-3: http://paste.openstack.org/show/755057/ | |
| 09:59:08 | kashyap | aspiers: I'm searching through the SEV series, to 'Depend On' a patch that parses surrounding bits from getDomainCapabilities() | |
| 10:01:15 | kashyap | aspiers: Probably somewhere surrounding here? https://review.opendev.org/#/c/640483/3/nova/virt/libvirt/config.py | |
| 10:02:41 | kashyap | (After I add the config class LibvirtConfigDomainCapsFirmwareEFI() or something like that) | |
| 10:03:03 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: Use os-brick locking for volume attach and detach https://review.opendev.org/614190 | |
| 10:03:50 | aspiers | kashyap: I don't think there is any unmerged patch you need to depend on | |
| 10:04:17 | aspiers | kashyap: that patch you linked was merged ages ago | |
| 10:04:17 | kashyap | aspiers: Yep, just realized | |
| 10:05:53 | aspiers | kashyap: well, maybe https://review.opendev.org/#/c/673151/3 | |
| 10:06:01 | aspiers | which is the one I'm asking you to look at anyway :) | |
| 10:06:56 | kashyap | aspiers: Yeah, I have it open, and have half read the commit message, while I got 3 pings :D | |
| 10:07:04 | aspiers | hacking on nova feels a bit like wandering around a vast desert, and the experience of randomly bumping into someone else in the same vicinity is equally surprising | |
| 10:07:08 | kashyap | aspiers: Will spend time on it tooday, definitely | |
| 10:07:42 | aspiers | kashyap: just realised that maybe the subject of that commit is misleading | |
| 10:08:02 | aspiers | it's enhancing the parsing of *capabilities* not domain caps | |
| 10:08:34 | aspiers | the change regarding domain caps is that getDomCaps API gets called more often as a result (for the canonical machine types in addition to the default machine type for the arch) | |
| 10:09:34 | kashyap | aspiers: Hehe, mind you, we're in a mini desert in the "Cosmos of Nova" -- we're in HDD (Hypervisor Driver Desert) | |
| 10:09:37 | aspiers | If I change (only) a commit message and rebase the stuff on top, will Gerrit/Zuul re-run all the CI on an identical git tree? | |
| 10:09:48 | aspiers | true X-D | |
| 10:10:08 | kashyap | lyarwood: --^ | |