| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2019-09-10 | |||
| 15:21:09 | bauzas | cool | |
| 15:21:22 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: actually we set instance.numa_topology in the API layer I think | |
| 15:21:30 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: i think the code is correct but im not sure im happy with this be in a diffreent location then the other places we create a numa toplogy implcitly | |
| 15:22:15 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: yea, that is agreement on the PTG, people said they want the vpmem on no numa instance, but I totally understand your point | |
| 15:23:01 | alex_xu | I can't remember who is asking, but it should be redhat people | |
| 15:23:46 | sean-k-mooney | well as a redhat person i did not but i think maybe dansmith prefered supporting this. i kown we said we woudl do that at the PTG however | |
| 15:24:16 | alex_xu | yea, actually I'm on your side in the beginning | |
| 15:24:17 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: do you have an xml i can inspect | |
| 15:24:42 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: um, what? | |
| 15:24:44 | sean-k-mooney | e.g. an exmaple xml that was generated using this code | |
| 15:25:11 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: luyao has, but she is on the way home~ | |
| 15:25:14 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: you prefered to add pmem suport without requireing numa in the inital version corect? | |
| 15:25:29 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: i could be miss rememebring if so my applogies | |
| 15:26:13 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: i just rememebr you and i were the most active redhatters in that discuession in the ptg. | |
| 15:26:43 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: here is one http://52.27.155.124/95/674895/35/check/pmem-tempest-plugin-filtered/af5fdef/controller/logs/screen-n-cpu.txt.gz | |
| 15:27:06 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: search the 'pmem', you will see the xml output by nova-compute log | |
| 15:27:34 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: I seriously doubt I said that | |
| 15:29:22 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: in that case my applogies for invoking your name :) | |
| 15:29:34 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: so this is the generated domain | |
| 15:29:36 | sean-k-mooney | http://paste.openstack.org/show/774840/ | |
| 15:30:06 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Fix the race in confirm resize func test https://review.opendev.org/681238 | |
| 15:30:13 | gibi | mriedem, bauzas: ^^ | |
| 15:30:58 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: it is both pinning ram of the and the core of the guest to float over host numa node 0 | |
| 15:31:23 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: yes, but I think the is based on old patchset, since that ci job always pull a old version of luyao's patch | |
| 15:31:34 | alex_xu | in new version, it shouldn't have the pinning | |
| 15:31:35 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: but it is not specificy a constrait on pmem device as far as i can see | |
| 15:33:05 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: yes, that is the output for patchset13, sorry | |
| 15:33:24 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: im not sure that is a good thing. but ok. do you have an updated run | |
| 15:33:29 | sean-k-mooney | ill check the ci logs i guess | |
| 15:33:48 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: luyao is trying to get one for you | |
| 15:34:04 | sean-k-mooney | http://52.27.155.124/93/671793/23/check/pmem-tempest-plugin-filtered/23b32fa/ shoudl have them right | |
| 15:34:28 | sean-k-mooney | that from ps 23 | |
| 15:34:49 | sean-k-mooney | i found one | |
| 15:35:03 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: no, it won't, the CI always try to apply the PS13, Rui is trying to remove that. That is why you can see other patch also can pass the pmem ci test | |
| 15:37:04 | sean-k-mooney | in the new code will both the numatune and cputune element be removed if only a pmem device is requested in the flavor | |
| 15:39:19 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: To my eyes this whole NUMA and PMEM interaction looks sutble enough that some more functional testing is required... | |
| 15:41:48 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: well there are functional tests in https://review.opendev.org/#/c/678470/27 | |
| 15:41:53 | sean-k-mooney | but i have not looked at them yet | |
| 15:42:50 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Ah, missed it; thx | |
| 15:43:59 | sean-k-mooney | ... its locking up my firefox windwo trying to open it for some reason | |
| 15:44:16 | bauzas | gibi: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/681238/3 | |
| 15:44:22 | bauzas | gibi: can I update the commit msg ? | |
| 15:44:45 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: the functional test will not assert anythin about the xml generation | |
| 15:44:46 | gibi | bauzas: sure go ahead | |
| 15:45:55 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Sure, I see those are already in the main change. | |
| 15:46:41 | sean-k-mooney | there are no assertion made about numa element in the main change as far as i can tell | |
| 15:46:54 | sean-k-mooney | rather numatune and cputune | |
| 15:48:07 | bauzas | gibi: cool, will do and +2 | |
| 15:48:12 | gibi | bauzas: thanks a lot | |
| 15:48:41 | mriedem | gibi: nits in https://review.opendev.org/#/c/676140/19 for a follow up | |
| 15:48:52 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: Fix the race in confirm resize func test https://review.opendev.org/681238 | |
| 15:49:25 | sean-k-mooney | efried_afk: alex_xu ill try to come back to the pmem stuff in an hour or so. i need to review stephens patch then sync with artom | |
| 15:49:52 | gibi | mriedem: ack. thanks | |
| 15:50:07 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: you wanted me to review https://review.opendev.org/#/c/671793/ specifcally right. should i also review the rest | |
| 15:50:27 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: would be helpful, aye | |
| 15:50:35 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: i got one http://paste.openstack.org/show/774842/ | |
| 15:50:37 | stephenfin | I'm marching through the pmem stuff | |
| 15:51:05 | bauzas | but I'll look at your series tomorrow morning | |
| 15:51:13 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: looking | |
| 15:51:16 | artom | sean-k-mooney, for once, I think I'm good, and do not require your excellent services :) | |
| 15:52:30 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: i think that that is correct. it is creatin a virtual numa toplogy but it is not tiying it to the host in any way | |
| 15:53:06 | sean-k-mooney | artom: the pmem device is also assocaitated with the virtual guest numa node 0 | |
| 15:53:27 | sean-k-mooney | artom: are you working on fixing the persitence issue | |
| 15:54:05 | sean-k-mooney | artom: i jsut wanted to circle back and see if you had anything form me to test or if i should start looking into where to fix the issue | |
| 15:54:22 | artom | sean-k-mooney, I added instance.refresh() back it, so that's settled | |
| 15:54:31 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: but I think this is wrong https://review.opendev.org/#/c/678455/25/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py@5458 | |
| 15:54:42 | sean-k-mooney | artom: ok did you push that? | |
| 15:54:51 | artom | The func tests weren't hitting it because driver.cleanup() is called conditionally, and the func test env isn't meeting those conditions | |
| 15:54:53 | artom | sean-k-mooney, I did push | |
| 15:55:03 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: I checked the nova show, I saw there is "hw:numa_nodes" being added, so I guess that is persistented in the db | |
| 15:55:06 | sean-k-mooney | ok then ill check it locally unless you have already | |
| 15:55:09 | artom | If I just change the code to always call it, I can reproduce | |
| 15:55:19 | sean-k-mooney | artom: that is not correct | |
| 15:55:20 | artom | And instance.refresh() does indeed fix it | |
| 15:55:27 | artom | sean-k-mooney, I know :) It was just to test | |
| 15:55:33 | mriedem | stephenfin: did you ever re-post your PCPU upgrade ML thread with [nova] tagged on it to actually get operator visibility? | |
| 15:55:42 | artom | Next step is to trigger driver.cleanup in the "real" way in func tests | |
| 15:55:48 | sean-k-mooney | we should not see hw:numa_nodes in nova show | |
| 15:55:59 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: yes, we shouldn't | |
| 15:56:01 | sean-k-mooney | artom: sorry that was for allex | |
| 15:56:12 | sean-k-mooney | artom: i have not looked at your change | |
| 15:56:19 | stephenfin | mriedem: No, it didn't seem necessary since we'd solved the upgrade issue in a way that didn't require anything special from the operator | |
| 15:56:28 | stephenfin | outside of bog standard config options | |
| 15:56:34 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: we should not see hw:numa_nodes=1 if its not in the flavor | |
| 15:56:51 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: we do not see that when you get implcit numa toplogyies in other cases | |
| 15:57:02 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: so if you are seeing it then the code is incorrect | |
| 15:57:08 | artom | sean-k-mooney, we're good, don't worry :) | |
| 15:57:17 | mriedem | stephenfin: isn't dansmith's comment all about a nasty upgrade problem? | |
| 15:57:26 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: I think the problem is the patch is change instance.flavor direclty, after driver.spawn, the nova-comptue update the instance object, then persistent it into the db. | |
| 15:57:28 | mriedem | to which operators, like mnaser, might want to weigh in? | |
| 15:57:32 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: if we were to cold migrate the instance the behavior sould chagne if we save it to the db | |
| 15:57:47 | mnaser | hm | |
| 15:57:53 | dansmith | mriedem: yeah, the "plan" doesn't seem super great to me as currently laid out :/ | |
| 15:57:59 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: ya we shoudl not be changeing tehe flavor at all | |
| 15:58:13 | stephenfin | mriedem: an intractable one though. Even if operators don't like the little dance we're doing, I fail to see how there's an alternative | |
| 15:58:14 | mriedem | mnaser: you'd need someone to tl;dr it (i would also) | |
| 15:58:15 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: the other case dont chagne the flaovr they just create a numa toplogy | |
| 15:58:21 | mriedem | since there are 5 conversations going on at once in here right now | |
| 15:58:23 | mnaser | sounds like an ML post? | |
| 15:58:28 | mnaser | that i can read | |