| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2020-06-17 | |||
| 18:59:03 | sean-k-mooney | that is ok i guess since you can use the image property if you care | |
| 18:59:16 | melwitt | and yeah that's the code I was looking and the helper function being called there | |
| 19:00:21 | sean-k-mooney | ya so this https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/6ed556f4adfd8a98fae2e91204f1ce0484f5dd9d/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L5351-L5367 is basically working around libvit/qemu not doing the right thing by default | |
| 19:01:43 | sean-k-mooney | well and the fact we set a default in the xml generation class | |
| 19:01:51 | sean-k-mooney | so if we remove that default | |
| 19:02:02 | sean-k-mooney | then we might not need all those specal cases | |
| 19:02:37 | melwitt | ok, well one step at a time I guess :P | |
| 19:02:52 | melwitt | I do some local tests to see what happens when I remove the default | |
| 19:02:57 | melwitt | *I'll | |
| 19:03:45 | sean-k-mooney | ok let me know an i can review. https://www.kraxel.org/blog/2019/09/display-devices-in-qemu/ is a review of some to the option and recomendations | |
| 19:04:21 | melwitt | thanks | |
| 19:04:21 | sean-k-mooney | i need to remove the gop device i added by mistake last cycle and add https://www.kraxel.org/blog/2019/09/display-devices-in-qemu/#bochs-display | |
| 19:04:45 | sean-k-mooney | apparently gop is only for the bhve hypervior but the libvirt doc did not mention that | |
| 19:06:40 | sean-k-mooney | bochs implements a uefi graphic output protocol (gop) device for kvm | |
| 19:07:03 | sean-k-mooney | so that is the one i should have added | |
| 19:10:06 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: during the ptg we disucssed breifly the idea of a resize for something other then a flavor change | |
| 19:10:58 | sean-k-mooney | maybe this could be another usecause for that | |
| 19:12:19 | sean-k-mooney | i think this was in the context of changing machine_types where i was suggeign a new retype server action but perhaps something more generic that would update the embed flavor and image with the latest would make more sense | |
| 19:12:40 | sean-k-mooney | e.g. a recreate action but that preserved all ports, volume and disks | |
| 19:14:13 | melwitt | how was that suggestion received, I'm curious heh | |
| 19:14:57 | melwitt | like, I know lots of people would like to do that. in my case, I'm trying to recover from what I consider a bug, the default being set to a deprecated thing and glitching out the vnc console | |
| 19:15:20 | sean-k-mooney | reusing resize was dansmith idea i was thinking it shoudl be its onw server action. not sure if dansmith actully was in favor or just saying if it was to be done i would start there | |
| 19:15:45 | melwitt | ah, cool | |
| 19:16:08 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: the main think would be that recreate would have to be a move operation like resize so we can validate the new requirement | |
| 19:16:19 | sean-k-mooney | since we cant assume the current host is valid anymore | |
| 19:16:36 | melwitt | yeah. well, we validate the new stuff on a rebuild too since a few releases ago | |
| 19:16:51 | sean-k-mooney | but i think it would fix a lot of the thing that hard reboot fix but which require the flaovr or image properties to be modified | |
| 19:17:06 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: only if the image changes | |
| 19:17:13 | melwitt | yeah, it would make life a lot easier for a lot of people | |
| 19:17:46 | sean-k-mooney | yeah so i think it has merit but not sure where it sits in the priortiy queue | |
| 19:17:49 | melwitt | yeah, I'm just saying that we validate even during rebuild so I think it makes sense to validate on a recreate/resize if we're consuming new image props etc | |
| 19:18:03 | melwitt | we're already doing it | |
| 19:18:10 | melwitt | *doing similar | |
| 19:18:21 | sean-k-mooney | for me i think it would be a good way to opt into changing the machine type for example | |
| 19:19:59 | sean-k-mooney | anyway im going to go buy icecream and i guess other food before the stores start to close | |
| 19:22:53 | sean-k-mooney | hum not sure if good pr or pr blunder https://www.benjerry.ie/flavours/netflix-and-chillld-ice-cream | |
| 19:28:03 | melwitt | thanks for the video model chat o/ | |
| 19:36:30 | mnaser | is there reasoning behind what has ended up being validated in the api layer and what doesn't get validated in the api layer? | |
| 19:37:03 | mnaser | i haven't replicated this yet (but in theory i can imagine it's possible): end user tried to create a vm where image size > disk size when doing bfv | |
| 19:37:16 | mnaser | and they don't really get much more of a helpful error (and their request gets refused too obviously) | |
| 19:37:35 | mnaser | but only after it fails, in what i assume nova-compute trying to ask cinder to create a disk that's impossible to create | |
| 19:53:43 | melwitt | mnaser: generally we validate whatever we can in the api layer to fail fast and avoid the behavior you're describing (fail later on nova-compute). within reason though, as some checks would involve rpc call to the compute host and we avoid that to some degree | |
| 19:54:24 | melwitt | mnaser: I found this part where we validate the image_min_disk against the volume disk size, but that might be different than just the image size as in your example? https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/api.py#L681 | |
| 19:56:15 | mnaser | melwitt: oh interesting, you're right, i wonder if this is a case where the user did not have min_disk specified.. | |
| 19:56:58 | mnaser | melwitt: oh but we don't do image_size > dest_size | |
| 19:57:15 | mnaser | unlike https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/api.py#L693-L695 | |
| 19:58:01 | mnaser | so i _think_ the scenario is no min_disk but no checks on image_size / dst_size | |
| 19:58:24 | melwitt | right thats what I was saying I wonder if thats different | |
| 19:59:05 | melwitt | actually don't know why it's different but I'm not a bfv expert | |
| 19:59:28 | mnaser | melwitt: i think it is, min_size is taken from a glance property which is user-provided (unless a snapshot is taken) | |
| 19:59:34 | mnaser | so i assume user here uploaded an image without min_size | |
| 20:01:06 | melwitt | yeah I mean I don't know why we wouldn't do the same checks for the volume case | |
| 20:01:15 | melwitt | like is that intentional or an oversight | |
| 20:02:55 | mnaser | melwitt: yeah -- in my opinion its an oversight but indeed, maybe someone knows better :) | |
| 20:02:59 | mnaser | anyhow | |
| 20:03:04 | mnaser | ill have a patch up shortly | |
| 20:05:39 | mnaser | melwitt: i swear i saw you mention a while back a key to click before copying from github which gave you a commit hash'd url instead of master | |
| 20:05:56 | melwitt | it's 'y' | |
| 20:09:09 | mnaser | oh awesome, thanks | |
| 20:09:49 | mnaser | https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1883969 | |
| 20:09:49 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1883969 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Nova doesn't fail at API layer when image_size > volume_size with BFV" [Undecided,New] | |
| 20:13:08 | melwitt | sweet mnaser++ | |
| 20:14:25 | openstackgerrit | Mohammed Naser proposed openstack/nova master: bfv: check if image_size > volume_size in API https://review.opendev.org/736370 | |
| 20:14:40 | mnaser | melwitt: ^ voila, the unit test i wrote passed locally but i didnt run the whole suite | |
| 20:14:44 | mnaser | it makes sense to me™ | |
| 20:14:44 | mnaser | it makes sense to meâ„¢ | |
| 20:20:08 | openstackgerrit | Mohammed Naser proposed openstack/nova master: bfv: check if image_size > volume_size in API https://review.opendev.org/736370 | |
| 20:36:35 | melwitt | mnaser: cool I'll check it | |
| 22:09:24 | gmann | sean-k-mooney: mnaser and to make listing flavor better (instead of need of --private or --all explicitly ) we should add the admin as default tenant access in private flavor. currently what all admin can list the flavors by default and what all it can delete is not matching. | |
| 22:09:55 | gmann | also --private and --all is all admin things and for non-admin --private is just ignored - https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/6ed556f4adfd8a98fae2e91204f1ce0484f5dd9d/nova/api/openstack/compute/flavors.py#L106 | |
| 22:13:42 | gmann | if we add admin as default tenant access in private flavor then i think we can solve it in backward compatible way but it will be interop issue so that still need microversion. | |
| #openstack-nova - 2020-06-18 | |||
| 03:37:13 | openstackgerrit | Jinsheng Zhang proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add nova-support-multiple-boot-volume-with-boot-order-selection spec https://review.opendev.org/736422 | |
| 04:05:12 | openstackgerrit | Jinsheng Zhang proposed openstack/nova-specs master: fix "Line limited" error https://review.opendev.org/736425 | |
| 05:07:20 | openstackgerrit | Jinsheng Zhang proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add nova-support-multiple-boot-volume-with-boot-order-selection spec https://review.opendev.org/736422 | |
| 05:43:46 | openstackgerrit | Jinsheng Zhang proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add nova-support-multiple-boot-volume-with-boot-order-selection spec fix document error https://review.opendev.org/736422 | |
| 07:50:29 | gibi | sean-k-mooney, melwitt: re: resize without changing the flavor, the context on the PTG was that changing a resource request of a port might also needs a move operation without changing the flavor | |
| 07:51:28 | gibi | sean-k-mooney, melwitt: I'll try to propose a spec for discussion during this cycle so your input about machine_type change and video mode change being similar use case helps. | |
| 07:52:45 | gibi | sean-k-mooney, melwitt: however I think this spec will be targeted to W not V due to time constraints and discussion needs | |
| 08:00:25 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: ah yes i could not recall what it was in relation too | |
| 08:01:48 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: i think there are other usecases too such as recreatign the vm with the same image and flavor but just updating the embeded copy to pick up change to extra_specs and image metadata without actually imaging the disk | |
| 08:03:24 | gibi | but still cold migrating the VM if the current host is not good for the updted extra_spec / image metadata? | |
| 08:03:35 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: yes | |
| 08:03:48 | sean-k-mooney | i would guess in generall it would be a move opertation | |
| 08:03:49 | gibi | OK, that seems like the same operation that I would need for the qos update | |
| 08:04:13 | sean-k-mooney | it might be vaild to use the same host but likely the schduler would not select the same host | |
| 08:04:30 | sean-k-mooney | it might but basically the same as same host resize | |
| 08:05:11 | sean-k-mooney | i guess we could always add a weigher to make it prefer the same host | |
| 08:05:44 | sean-k-mooney | but thats not really important | |
| 08:08:54 | gibi | yeah, I can imagine that the end user needs an to update these data if it does not cause downtime (cold migration) of the VM | |
| 08:09:13 | gibi | * needs an option to update | |
| 08:09:28 | gibi | but same host resize is still downtime today | |
| 08:09:57 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: currently you need to do a db edit and a hard reboot | |
| 08:10:42 | sean-k-mooney | the downstream issue that melwitt was looking at is related to the fact that in rhel 8.2 the default we use in nova "cirrus" was deprecated | |
| 08:10:44 | sean-k-mooney | https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1651994 | |
| 08:10:44 | openstack | sean-k-mooney: Error: Error getting bugzilla.redhat.com bug #1651994: NotPermitted | |
| 08:11:01 | sean-k-mooney | oh thats private well that is what it was tracking | |
| 08:11:43 | sean-k-mooney | anyway 16.0 which is based on train was released on 8.1 16.1 will be on 8.2 | |
| 08:12:31 | sean-k-mooney | so customer are now in the situation where the default model that nova will select is deprecaed and there is no way via the api to change this on existing instance other than rebuild | |
| 08:13:08 | sean-k-mooney | we wont be able to back port this new command or whatever it will be but it might help in the future | |
| 08:39:31 | openstackgerrit | Wenping Song proposed openstack/nova master: delete sub resource provider when delete resource provider https://review.opendev.org/719163 | |