| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-01-22 | |||
| 01:19:04 | gmann | def index() in new controller will just call the old SimpleTenantUsageController.index() and have @wsgi.Controller.api_version("2.90") | |
| 01:19:49 | brinzhang_ | gmann: ok, we will try to use the two option | |
| 01:20:05 | brinzhang_ | a question | |
| 01:21:00 | brinzhang_ | @wsgi.Controller.api_version("2.1", "2.89") and @wsgi.Controller.api_version("2.90") for the api change, is it need to change with the router change? | |
| 01:21:15 | brinzhang_ | I mean keep this change in 768852 patch | |
| 01:21:57 | brinzhang_ | gmann: what do you think? | |
| 01:25:29 | gmann | brinzhang_: in routes.py if you rename the file then 1. for old API route, change import (from nova.api.openstack.compute import simple_tenant_usage -> from nova.api.openstack.compute import simple_project_usage ) | |
| 01:25:47 | gmann | and for new API add new route as separate | |
| 01:29:07 | gmann | brinzhang_: like this http://paste.openstack.org/show/801854/ | |
| 01:30:26 | brinzhang_ | gmann: yeah, get it | |
| 01:31:28 | brinzhang_ | gmann: above question is which patch I shuold change the max or min version changing of the index and show usages apis? | |
| 01:32:06 | gmann | but other file like request/response sample file can exist in separate if it become very lengthy and unreadable | |
| 01:32:53 | gmann | brinzhang_: ah that is good question but tricky also. | |
| 01:33:10 | brinzhang_ | ok, I can seperate the route change from 768852 | |
| 01:35:26 | gmann | brinzhang_: it has to be route change in 768852 and 768509 changing the response etc. so 768509 as first will not change anything for older microversion | |
| 01:35:45 | gmann | so you current order of patches is good | |
| 01:36:14 | gmann | this way in 768852 we expose the new API url with new response | |
| 01:36:45 | gmann | and restrict old API with 2.89 and return old response | |
| 01:37:06 | brinzhang_ | ok, just need to do these changes in 768852 ^ | |
| 01:37:24 | brinzhang_ | and keep the 768509 not change | |
| 01:37:41 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for aggregates https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760235 | |
| 01:37:42 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for allocations https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760236 | |
| 01:37:43 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for allocation candidates https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760237 | |
| 01:37:44 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for inventories https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760238 | |
| 01:37:45 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for resource classes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760239 | |
| 01:37:46 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for traits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760241 | |
| 01:37:47 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for usage https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760242 | |
| 01:37:57 | lbragstad | gmann ^ those should have all the bits for testing the deprecated policies | |
| 01:39:28 | gmann | lbragstad: thanks. I will review tomorrow with results. basically almost good to go just need to have new test green | |
| 01:40:03 | gmann | brinzhang_: yes. for this route things. I will review the complete series tomorrow if any thing else missing | |
| 01:40:28 | brinzhang_ | gmann: thanks | |
| 01:40:29 | lbragstad | gmann sounds good - they all pass for me locally, i'll follow up tomorrow | |
| 01:40:34 | gmann | brinzhang_: key thing is to pass the existing tests and Tempest without any change means you are not breaking anything :) | |
| 01:40:42 | gmann | lbragstad: great. | |
| 01:41:25 | gmann | brinzhang_: if you have to change anything then we are introducing some backward incompatible change | |
| 01:41:35 | brinzhang_ | gmann: yeah, the tempest change will change as your suggestion, and it you can review tomorrow | |
| 01:42:08 | gmann | brinzhang_: +1 | |
| 01:42:19 | brinzhang_ | yes, we cannt break the old test in tempest | |
| 01:42:42 | gmann | I can help on Tempest change tomorrow if anything you miss of need help with. | |
| 01:42:50 | gmann | *or need | |
| 01:47:06 | gmann | brinzhang_: going away. will check the series tomorrow. happy Friday to you :) | |
| 01:47:54 | brinzhang_ | gmann: thanks, good night^^ | |
| 03:04:15 | brinzhang_ | gmann: hi are you around? | |
| 03:05:20 | brinzhang_ | nova/tests/functional/api_sample_tests/api_samples/os-simple-project-usage/simple-tenant-usage-get.json.tpl like this file, the sample file do need keep ing the "os-simple-tenant-usage" dir? | |
| 03:05:30 | brinzhang_ | s/ing/under | |
| 03:44:56 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for resource providers https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760240 | |
| 03:44:57 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for aggregates https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760235 | |
| 03:44:58 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for allocations https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760236 | |
| 03:44:59 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for allocation candidates https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760237 | |
| 03:45:00 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for inventories https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760238 | |
| 03:45:01 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for resource classes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760239 | |
| 03:45:02 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for traits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760241 | |
| 03:45:03 | openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/placement master: Implement secure RBAC for usage https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760242 | |
| 08:20:21 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: hi! I don't find the bp https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/port-scoped-sriov-numa-affinity behind https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/765901 spec | |
| 09:12:45 | nightmare_unreal | i have submitted a bug report for placement on launchpad but I found there is a storyboard for placement, should I mark it as invalid and submit again on storyboard ? | |
| 09:22:40 | frickler | nightmare_unreal: interesting question. since placement has moved back to nova governance, I'd say it should also revert to using LP, but that's mainly my aversion against sb speaking | |
| 09:23:43 | nightmare_unreal | okay frickler , i will wait for some time . Someone might look at it | |
| 09:24:02 | nightmare_unreal | and will let me know if it should be moved or not | |
| 09:24:51 | frickler | gibi: ^^ ptl topic probably ;) | |
| 09:27:20 | gibi | nightmare_unreal, frickler: interesting question, I would not start a move back to launchpad just because we have a single core team | |
| 09:27:41 | gibi | but there could be other legitimate reasons | |
| 09:27:57 | nightmare_unreal | got it | |
| 09:28:45 | gibi | nightmare_unreal: link me to the bug I please | |
| 09:29:00 | nightmare_unreal | gibi: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1912749 | |
| 09:29:02 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1912749 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "clouds.yaml does not use placement API version variable" [Undecided,New] | |
| 09:29:08 | gibi | thnaks | |
| 09:40:59 | frickler | gibi: I think the main question would be how to integrate storyboard into your bug tracking workflows, assuring that issues created there aren't just getting ignored | |
| 09:59:41 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: docs: Add reference docs for internal block device structures https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/771711 | |
| 10:01:25 | brinzhang_ | gibi: good moning^ | |
| 10:03:09 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Remove MIN_LIBVIRT_VIR_ERR_DEVICE_MISSING https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/754702 | |
| 10:07:37 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Remove MIN_LIBVIRT_VIR_ERR_DEVICE_MISSING https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/754702 | |
| 10:07:38 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Drop support for UML https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/743230 | |
| 10:07:40 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Drop support for Xen https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/743231 | |
| 10:07:42 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Bump MIN_{LIBVIRT,QEMU}_VERSION and NEXT_MIN_{LIBVIRT,QEMU}_VERSION https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/754700 | |
| 10:07:44 | lyarwood | ^ had to rebase these for the ceph gate fix and to resolve a conflict in the UML and Xen removal changes | |
| 10:08:21 | brinzhang_ | lyarwood: morning^ | |
| 10:14:53 | lyarwood | brinzhang_: morning, what's up? | |
| 10:16:28 | gibi | frickler: regardless of the bug tracking tool, we are a bit behind triaging placement bugs due to multiple reasons | |
| 10:16:38 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: zuul: Allow encryption tests in nova-ceph-multistore again https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/771837 | |
| 10:20:45 | gibi | lyarwood: plugged back my +2s on the libvirt bump series | |
| 10:22:39 | nightmare_unreal | gibi: did you saw the bug , does it fit on placement project ? | |
| 10:22:42 | openstackgerrit | Wenping Song proposed openstack/nova master: Replace os-simple-tenant-usage with os-simple-project-usage https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/768852 | |
| 10:22:58 | brinzhang_ | lyarwood: this morning, gmann's give me some suggestion to update he tenant-usages patch, but while I do it, I found in one file inherit the orignal class, the function in the class with @wsgi.Controller.api_version limit the request version | |
| 10:23:06 | gibi | nightmare_unreal: I opened in a browser tab, but haven't spent time on it yet | |
| 10:23:17 | nightmare_unreal | gibi: ACK :) | |
| 10:23:18 | gibi | nightmare_unreal: I will try to get to it | |
| 10:23:24 | nightmare_unreal | thanks | |
| 10:24:14 | brinzhang_ | but when I test the case, I cannot reqire the 2.90 index or show api in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/768852/8/nova/api/openstack/compute/simple_project_usage.py#408 | |
| 10:25:00 | brinzhang_ | lyarwood: the request always request the api in 2.40~2.89, where is wrong? | |
| 10:27:45 | brinzhang_ | lyarwood: that case in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/768852/8/nova/tests/unit/api/openstack/compute/test_simple_project_usage.py#586 | |
| 10:28:22 | brinzhang_ | lyarwood: I am not sure what I missed, maybe the inherit function is not right | |
| 10:29:09 | lyarwood | brinzhang_: so if a 2.90 request isn't being made then that's an issue with the test not the api code | |
| 10:29:51 | lyarwood | brinzhang_: and looking at the test I can't see anything that should stop it, I've never really touched this test code however so it might be something weird like an extra var required somewhere | |
| 10:31:24 | brinzhang_ | lyarwood: I am not found these test cases where need to change, I have spent almost 3 hours on this :( | |
| 10:51:41 | lyarwood | brinzhang_: yeah I'm not sure, I thought you had to add a reference to the controller in the test but there's more missing | |
| 10:51:50 | lyarwood | brinzhang_: I'll try to play around with it later if you're still stuck | |
| 10:52:57 | brinzhang_ | lyarwood: thanks, I would like gmann can have a check today | |
| 10:53:18 | brinzhang_ | after dinner I will try to trace it | |
| 10:54:07 | brinzhang_ | gmann: update the project usage patach follow your suggestion, pls help me check the question | |
| 10:54:44 | brinzhang_ | gmann: the case test run failed https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/768852/8/nova/tests/unit/api/openstack/compute/test_simple_project_usage.py#586 | |