| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-02-02 | |||
| 17:39:05 | stephenfin | I don't think so. Not for those. They're usless now | |
| 17:39:08 | stephenfin | *useless | |
| 17:39:20 | bauzas | we can't blindly provide a port without knowing which segment was used | |
| 17:39:39 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: we can | |
| 17:39:50 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: just create a port with a network | |
| 17:40:13 | bauzas | but then when moving, we won't have a segment | |
| 17:40:21 | sean-k-mooney | we will | |
| 17:40:31 | sean-k-mooney | it will be assocaite when we boot the vm | |
| 17:40:34 | sean-k-mooney | at port binding | |
| 17:40:39 | bauzas | lemme upload my new reviison | |
| 17:40:46 | sean-k-mooney | assuming its a routed network that is | |
| 17:40:53 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: no with the fixture | |
| 17:41:00 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: ah ok | |
| 17:41:08 | bauzas | so I need to mock this | |
| 17:41:22 | sean-k-mooney | well the fixture would need to model the ip deffered logic | |
| 17:41:31 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: you proably need to add a new netork to the fixture | |
| 17:41:41 | sean-k-mooney | then add logic that looks at the network id | |
| 17:41:52 | sean-k-mooney | if tis the routed one do extra stpes in binding | |
| 17:47:26 | lyarwood | stephenfin: ack will do | |
| 17:47:56 | stephenfin | thanks | |
| 18:24:54 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: Add requested_networks field to RequestSpec object https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/749977 | |
| 18:24:55 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Add a routed networks scheduler pre-filter https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/749068 | |
| 18:25:48 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: huzzah \o/ ^ | |
| 18:26:13 | bauzas | I found a solution for making sure that we would use the right segment | |
| 18:26:41 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: fwiw, now we check the existing segment when moving | |
| 18:27:40 | bauzas | or when passing a port with an immediate IP allocation | |
| 18:28:09 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: cool am i may not get time to reviwe it this evening | |
| 18:28:19 | sean-k-mooney | but ill take a look tomorrow in anycase | |
| 18:28:32 | sean-k-mooney | ping me about it if i dont get to it by the after noon | |
| 18:29:48 | bauzas | <3 | |
| 18:29:49 | sean-k-mooney | you did https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/749068/7/nova/tests/fixtures.py#2163 right | |
| 18:29:56 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Add a routed networks scheduler pre-filter https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/749068 | |
| 18:29:58 | sean-k-mooney | that is basically what i was suggesting | |
| 18:30:02 | sean-k-mooney | or similar | |
| 18:30:28 | sean-k-mooney | checking the network id to do the right thing for multi segment networks | |
| 18:30:55 | bauzas | yup but the question was to make sure that the segment was correct | |
| 18:31:12 | sean-k-mooney | oh and you now have the unit tests too | |
| 18:31:18 | sean-k-mooney | cool | |
| 18:31:20 | bauzas | yup, will do tomorrow | |
| 18:31:49 | sean-k-mooney | ah you just update the current ones ya ok ill look a this proply whwen i have tiem to fully load the context | |
| 18:32:03 | sean-k-mooney | it looks like your almost done however which is nice | |
| 18:32:26 | bauzas | no worries | |
| 18:32:55 | bauzas | fortunately, we only call create_port if the user passes a network | |
| 18:33:29 | bauzas | when passing a specific port (even a deferred), we don't call it, so that's why I was sure that the first segment was accepted | |
| 18:33:37 | sean-k-mooney | yep | |
| 18:34:29 | bauzas | anyway, /me goes off now | |
| 18:38:40 | gmann | stephenfin: ack, on it. | |
| 19:22:07 | gmann | stephenfin: lbragstad done. few which are from stephenfin need one more +2 | |
| 20:06:23 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/placement master: policy: Remove the deprecated 'placement' rule https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/772333 | |
| 20:20:29 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] support per port numa policies with sriov https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/773792 | |
| 21:02:50 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/placement master: Add functional-py3[89] tox targets https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760890 | |
| 21:36:37 | rm_work | augh, how do I use OSC to quickly see which hypervisors are in an AZ? | |
| 21:36:55 | rm_work | failing to find the right command to let me quickly see this | |
| 21:38:59 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/placement master: Pass context objects to oslo.policy directly https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/766785 | |
| 21:42:29 | rm_work | ok rather, failing to figure out how i can show the relationship between hypervisor and AZ/aggregate at all | |
| 21:42:47 | rm_work | I assume i'm missing something obvious | |
| 21:42:57 | rm_work | or fundamentally misunderstand how this relationship works | |
| 22:50:02 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam proposed openstack/placement master: DNM: testing direct l-c https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/773813 | |
| 23:32:32 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Include removal of ephemeral backing files in the image cache manager https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/689422 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2021-02-03 | |||
| 02:06:00 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: zuul: Increase SWIFT_LOOPBACK_DISK_SIZE within nova-lvm job https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/772702 | |
| 02:06:26 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: zuul: Mark nova-lvm as voting https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/772871 | |
| 02:10:50 | openstackgerrit | Wenping Song proposed openstack/nova master: Replaces tenant_id with project_id from Flavor Access APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/767704 | |
| 05:37:22 | xinranwang | Hi all, fyi, here is a test report for smartnic support. We have tested the code in local, you can also following the report's instruction to test our patches. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cyborg/TestReport/IntelNic | |
| 05:56:23 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Centralize sqlite FK constraint enforcement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/773833 | |
| 05:56:24 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: WIP Dynamically archive FK related records in archive_deleted_rows https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/773834 | |
| 09:16:55 | kashyap | lyarwood: Thanks for the rebase! | |
| 09:17:05 | kashyap | lyarwood: (On this one: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/758763) | |
| 09:19:44 | kashyap | It passed, BTW :-) | |
| 09:25:25 | lyarwood | kashyap: \o morning, np and cool I'll review now, elod ^ you also if you have time, could you review this please? | |
| 09:27:41 | kashyap | Morning | |
| 09:29:15 | kashyap | lyarwood: The tricky thing is that patch is a band-aid for some scenarios -- but will not fix the more difficult CPU-based live migration problems fully. | |
| 09:29:34 | kashyap | lyarwood: I've been thinking enough that I had a CPU model bug walk into my dream last night! | |
| 09:29:43 | lyarwood | haha | |
| 09:29:52 | kashyap | No kidding; I felt strange waking up | |
| 09:30:22 | kashyap | lyarwood: Given the bug OSP upgrades folks found ... for the fuller solution, a potential process trouble: | |
| 09:30:26 | lyarwood | kashyap: so that isn't going to resolve the the noTSX part? | |
| 09:31:13 | kashyap | lyarwood: It should, if your CPU problems are _just_ related to TSX | |
| 09:31:29 | lyarwood | kashyap: ack | |
| 09:31:53 | lyarwood | stephenfin: https://storage.gra.cloud.ovh.net/v1/AUTH_dcaab5e32b234d56b626f72581e3644c/zuul_opendev_logs_f6e/769920/3/check/openstack-tox-py38/f6e5b16/testr_results.html btw, looks like my posion patch found *some* get_arch holes | |
| 09:31:54 | kashyap | lyarwood: The aforementioned "process trouble" is: I'm working w/ chengsheng (don't see them on IRC for a while) here (https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/762330/) to switch to newer CPU APIs | |
| 09:32:12 | stephenfin | lyarwood: oh boy :) | |
| 09:32:14 | kashyap | I've suggested a patch split of 5 pieces for ease of reviewing in my comment on PS12. | |
| 09:32:59 | stephenfin | lyarwood: Can you look at this. Should unblock circa 10 RBAC patches https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/771852/ | |
| 09:33:02 | stephenfin | *? | |
| 09:33:09 | lyarwood | stephenfin: ack | |
| 09:34:32 | kashyap | If chengsheng is busy; I'll split it (and give attribution where due, of course) as per the original spec ... which is not proposed for W -- that's the "too late to get in spec" process part; we uncovered this problem only recently. | |
| 09:34:38 | lyarwood | stephenfin: ah re the stable placement changes, I'm not a placement stable core | |
| 09:34:55 | stephenfin | oh, really? | |
| 09:35:11 | stephenfin | that sounds like another situation where we should be merging nova and placement | |
| 09:35:18 | stephenfin | gibi? ^ | |
| 09:35:25 | lyarwood | yeah it's a old list + stable-maint-core | |
| 09:35:31 | lyarwood | which I'm also not a member of | |
| 09:35:39 | gibi | hm | |
| 09:35:57 | gibi | do you suggest to add nova-stable-core to placement-stable-core? | |
| 09:35:59 | lyarwood | kashyap: yeah it's too late for W | |
| 09:36:10 | kashyap | lyarwood: Right, aware of that | |
| 09:36:18 | stephenfin | Yeah, I think that's a reasonable move | |
| 09:36:24 | lyarwood | kashyap: but we can still get it into a good state for X | |
| 09:36:31 | kashyap | Yep | |
| 09:36:38 | lyarwood | gibi: yes I think that would help | |