Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2019-09-16
11:25:19 artom Otherwise we'll conflict
11:25:21 artom But yeah
11:26:39 sean-k-mooney aspiers: you cant read its ram but you could constuct a view of it by recodering the reads/writes to cache
11:27:05 lyarwood sean-k-mooney: sorry re you're earlier comment are you also suggesting avoding POSTing new stuff at all still? I've been holding off for the last week anyway but thought we were passed the bulk of it now.
11:27:10 artom I think what sean-k-mooney's saying is that the SEV work was *completely* pointless >;)
11:27:10 lyarwood your*
11:27:52 sean-k-mooney lyarwood: i personally am holding off posting new stuff until stephens changes land
11:28:04 sean-k-mooney or we decide to punt it
11:28:13 sean-k-mooney i dont want to take gate time form it
11:28:33 lyarwood ack I'll continue to hold off then, wasn't sure if you were just talking about landing new stuff or posting.
11:28:47 sean-k-mooney if its small sure. if you have 10 pending patchs for different thing i dont know
11:29:08 sean-k-mooney today is the cut off to not need an FFE i think
11:29:14 lyarwood kk
11:31:19 sean-k-mooney artom: :) not quite but as a person who previously worked at a hardware companiy im very carful of claims of hardware releatd security features
11:32:16 sean-k-mooney artom: also at this point any limitation of the technology are well within amd's court to go fix aspiers work is quite good
11:34:16 sean-k-mooney aspiers: the only real feedback i would give is the images are a little hard to read without clicking on them. the commandline ones more then anything else
11:34:31 sean-k-mooney the content looks good to me
11:42:28 openstackgerrit ya.wang proposed openstack/nova master: Fix typor of cpu model when check CPU compatibility https://review.opendev.org/682267
12:26:41 bauzas FWIW, I'm a bit on and off today, working back on the placement audit command
12:43:44 efried o/ nova!
12:43:50 efried ready for a fun-filled day of rechecks?!
12:45:08 sean-k-mooney at least we are down to 2 series
12:46:40 sean-k-mooney there is 1 patch need for vpmem, + https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:bp/cpu-resources+(status:open+OR+status:merged) + 2 pathes for forbiden aggreates i think
12:46:45 efried I'm starting to think there may actually be something wrong.
12:46:53 efried forbidden aggs is in.
12:47:01 sean-k-mooney oh ok
12:47:07 sean-k-mooney with the pmem stuff
12:47:07 efried And i think there's one for numalm, but not an important one
12:47:11 efried pmem and cpu-resources
12:47:14 efried are the big ones
12:47:32 sean-k-mooney i was ingoring the funcitonal tests for numalm
12:47:37 efried right
12:47:52 sean-k-mooney the actully featre has lannded just tests are leaft
12:48:17 efried 13 rechecks on the top cpu-resources patch
12:48:49 efried cascading effect of -2s in the gate from a prior patch failing.
12:48:51 efried mostly
12:49:05 sean-k-mooney ya that was what i was about to say
12:49:25 efried I think we have a race in select_destinations though
12:49:38 efried been seeing quite a few like this https://storage.gra1.cloud.ovh.net/v1/AUTH_dcaab5e32b234d56b626f72581e3644c/zuul_opendev_logs_778/674895/42/check/openstack-tox-py36/7787cd5/testr_results.html.gz
12:51:56 sean-k-mooney maybe or that test is just not deterministic
12:52:15 efried yeah, either way
12:52:19 efried it's not just that one test
12:52:32 efried I saw several similar failures with that same select_destinations unequal
12:52:48 efried I didn't dig all the way into them (lack of appropriate tooling on my phone)
12:52:51 sean-k-mooney all in the fallback tests
12:52:53 efried but thinking maybe I should at this point.
12:53:06 efried no, I remember seeing one in a pre-existing test (I think)
12:53:15 efried i.e. regression
12:53:39 sean-k-mooney we might not be mocking some global state in the tests?
12:54:06 sean-k-mooney that said the fallback code is very new so there might be something there
12:56:35 stephenfin efried: I'm thinking we should stop rechecking the two few patches for now
12:56:40 stephenfin *top
12:56:45 efried whyzat?
12:56:58 efried oo, I have a local repro
12:57:04 efried running the whole test class
12:57:10 efried nova.tests.unit.scheduler.test_scheduler.SchedulerManagerTestCase
12:57:15 efried sean-k-mooney: ^
12:57:39 sean-k-mooney ok then it is likely either a shared state issue or a bug in the code
12:57:42 stephenfin On account of having to recheck again if anything lower gets in. Better just get those lower ones in
12:57:55 sean-k-mooney but if that repoduces it locally that makes it eaiser to figure out
12:58:11 stephenfin Hmm, I've seen that as well, actually
12:58:28 stephenfin Okay, that sounds like a bug. That's testing the retry logic
12:59:05 efried stephenfin: if it's not affecting queue times -- which it probably isn't at this point -- then it's better to have the top ones kicked out by merge-failed -2s than to have to wait for them to pass the check pipeline again once the lower ones are in, imho
12:59:34 stephenfin that's a fair point
12:59:35 sean-k-mooney efried: im just about to grab lunch but ill dig into it when i get back if ye have not figured it out by then
12:59:35 efried stephenfin, sean-k-mooney: I definitely remember seeing the failure on a patch lower in the series at some point.
12:59:48 efried I don't remember which one now
12:59:53 efried where was that fallback introduced, again?
13:00:24 stephenfin efried: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/671801/
13:00:50 sean-k-mooney ya thats the patch that updated those tests too
13:00:59 stephenfin intermittently failing tests are the _best_
13:01:09 sean-k-mooney brb
13:05:46 shilpasd Eric: finally after so many rechecks isoalte agg patches are merged, tnx for your extended support
13:06:13 shilpasd Gibi: tnx for followup patch, review on isolate agg patches
13:06:43 efried shilpasd: Your work on this feature is really appreciated. Please pass our compliments on to your colleagues as well.
13:08:25 shilpasd dansmith: stephenfin: takashin: thanks for review
13:08:42 shilpasd efried: sure thanks
13:13:16 efried stephenfin: First thing that jumps out is test_select_destination_with_pcpu_fallback_disabled, which is a test, is calling test_select_destination_with_4_3_client, which is also a test. I.e. both are going to run "simultaneously", one being a subset of the other.
13:13:27 efried ...which should be fine, as long as neither is doing anything global
13:14:43 stephenfin they don't _look_ like they're doing anything global
13:18:01 kashyap print domain_caps[arch][machine_type]._os.loader.enums
13:18:06 kashyap Oops
13:18:38 kashyap (Disregard that, please)
13:21:28 kashyap efried: Mired in parsing some XML bits and testing :D
13:21:38 efried suuuure
13:21:40 kashyap Not my day today...
13:23:02 efried stephenfin: I agree. I'm looking through the other tests in that class; the problem could just as easily be caused by one of *them* doing something global.
13:44:33 mriedem gibi: a few comments in this bug fix of yours https://review.opendev.org/#/c/666857/
13:44:37 stephenfin efried: something is messing with flags
13:44:59 efried stephenfin: Because CONF is global mebbe?
13:45:08 stephenfin quite possibly, yeah
13:45:45 stephenfin 'CONF.workarounds.disable_fallback_pcpu_query' is intermittently 'False' despite me setting it to 'True' in the test
13:48:32 efried stephenfin: I can reproduce reliably locally when I skip test discovery, and reliably *not* reproduce when I let discovery happen (which runs the tests slower). So definitely racy.
13:54:30 efried stephenfin: Yeah, self.flags is just CONF.set_override
13:54:58 stephenfin and CONF is global
13:55:26 efried stephenfin: use oslo_config.fixture.Config
13:55:30 stephenfin This is hardly the first time we've got positive and negative tests for something config opt-driven though, is it?
13:56:08 sean-k-mooney well
13:56:24 sean-k-mooney you wont have two tests running at the same time in the same process
13:56:37 sean-k-mooney so its fine to set things with set flags

Earlier   Later