Posted	Nick	Remark
#openstack-nova - 2021-02-05
08:55:56	alexe9191	could be that at some certain point someone did something and just renamed it later without updating the aggregates..,,
08:56:17	bauzas	hmmm
08:56:31	bauzas	not sure, since the API verifies whether there are instances
08:56:47	alexe9191	the api was reporting that the host is in the correct az
08:56:54	alexe9191	nova service-list | grep host
08:56:58	alexe9191	showed the correct values
08:56:59	bauzas	are you sure the API is correct ?
08:57:03	bauzas	ack ok
08:57:05	alexe9191	the scheduler was not though...
08:57:16	alexe9191	also in the DB the mapping between the host and it's aggregate was also correct
08:57:27	bauzas	alexe9191: how do you know the scheduler was wrong, then ?
08:57:42	alexe9191	the scheduler was saying that host X is in AZ: nova
08:57:46	alexe9191	which is wrong
08:57:49	alexe9191	cause it's not
08:57:51	bauzas	when ?
08:58:06	bauzas	the AZFilter, you mean ?
08:58:09	alexe9191	when trying to build a machine, the AZfilter
08:58:10	alexe9191	yes
08:58:47	alexe9191	metadata = utils.aggregate_metadata_get_by_host(
08:58:48	alexe9191	host_state, key='availability_zone')
08:58:48	alexe9191	if 'availability_zone' in metadata:
08:58:49	alexe9191	hosts_passes = availability_zone in metadata['availability_zone']
08:58:49	alexe9191	host_az = metadata['availability_zone']
08:58:50	alexe9191	else:
08:58:50	alexe9191	hosts_passes = availability_zone == CONF.default_availability_zone
08:58:51	alexe9191	host_az = CONF.default_availability_zone
08:58:51	alexe9191	if not hosts_passes:
08:58:52	alexe9191	LOG.debug("Availability Zone '%(az)s' requested. "
08:58:52	alexe9191	"%(host_state)s has AZs: %(host_az)s",
08:58:53	alexe9191	{'host_state': host_state,
08:58:53	alexe9191	'az': availability_zone,
08:58:54	alexe9191	'host_az': host_az})
08:58:59	alexe9191	ow sorry, I should've used spwan my apologies
08:59:19	bauzas	by Rocky, we now have a placement prefilter for AZs
08:59:31	alexe9191	Indeed:)  We are gonna switch to that
08:59:32	bauzas	you could use it
08:59:41	bauzas	and verify whether it works
08:59:59	alexe9191	well not it does, i removed ONE host from the aggregate and re-added it
09:00:02	bauzas	that being said, I don't know why the filter wouldn't work
09:00:17	alexe9191	and that solved the problem for all the hosts being wrongly reported in nova AZ
09:07:59	openstackgerrit	Wenping Song proposed openstack/nova master: Replaces tenant_id with project_id from List/Show usage APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/768509
09:07:59	openstackgerrit	Wenping Song proposed openstack/nova master: Replace tenants* with projects* of policies https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/765315
09:13:14	brinzhang_	gmann: I am updating the os-simple-project-usage patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/768852, could you please help to review why the test cannot request the 2.90 version after I register the router with a new class?
09:15:12	brinzhang_	gmann: the test case in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/768852/9/nova/tests/unit/api/openstack/compute/test_simple_project_usage.py#681
10:38:04	openstackgerrit	Elod Illes proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Tool to list launchpad bug status https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/774223
10:42:09	openstackgerrit	Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: Add a routed networks scheduler pre-filter https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/749068
10:42:44	openstackgerrit	Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: Add a routed networks scheduler pre-filter https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/749068
10:42:47	bauzas	gibi: sean-k-mooney: finally done ^
11:10:51	gibi	bauzas: ack, added to my queue
12:15:14	sean-k-mooney	bauzas: nice ill review it today
13:41:35	openstackgerrit	Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Allow disabling CPU flags via `cpu_model_extra_flags` https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/774240
13:46:56	kashyap	gibi (or anyone): --^ When you can, can you have a quick look of the above? I'm not sure if I quite got the parsing right there
14:15:35	sean-k-mooney	kashyap: that is not something we can really do at this point in the cycle
14:15:56	sean-k-mooney	kashyap: it requires a spec and we are well passed that point
14:17:20	sean-k-mooney	kashyap: there was an outstandign debate around support +/- syntax partly due to parsing issues with hypenated flags that may exists
14:17:40	sean-k-mooney	but there was also concern about haveing to config options
14:19:02	sean-k-mooney	its a somewhat small feature which if gibi and other were open to allowing as a specless blueprint we could psersue but we need to resolve the config opention issue first
14:20:04	sean-k-mooney	the parsing is relitivly simple to fix since we also have it comma sperated so we just need to d a starts with check
14:20:51	sean-k-mooney	so we can go with the +/- sysntax if we want too but just wanted to raise that old issue and the procedual point that technicaly we should not be adding feature now
14:40:35	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: Spec? WTF?
14:40:42	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: Spec is *really* overkill
14:40:51	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: I have an old blueprint; that more than suffices
14:40:59	kashyap	https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/allow-disabling-cpu-flags
14:41:46	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: Okay ... I was AFK, only now fully catching up. You do say "specless blueprint"
14:41:49	kashyap	That's good
14:41:53	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: The BP exists for more than a year
14:42:44	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: The startswith check is also there, of course. Not sure if you've read the change
14:43:19	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: I can argue in good faith that this is also a bug-fix. As it absolutely helps during upgrades for operators.
14:44:09	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: And what hyphenated flags are you talking about? Example, please. There are no hyphenated CPU flags
14:44:20	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: The +/- syntax is the simplest way to go.
14:44:53	sean-k-mooney	kashyap:correct right now but this was discussed at the ptg many moons ago now and there was some disagrepmetn on that syntax
14:45:20	sean-k-mooney	im not against it but we shoudl not assuem the kernel will not add hypenated cpu flags
14:45:26	sean-k-mooney	its simple to supprot
14:45:37	kashyap	What's the disagreement? I don't recall. Please, let's keep things concrete
14:45:48	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: Indeed, it is simple. I hope we don't get bogged down in the weeds
14:46:01	sean-k-mooney	just change flag = flag.strip('-') to flag = flag[1:]
14:46:32	sean-k-mooney	kashyap: the was a view expressed that deployment tools may prefer 2 config opitons instead of 1
14:46:35	kashyap	Looking at your comments ...
14:46:41	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: Thanks for the quick review
14:48:15	sean-k-mooney	if you do flag = flag[1:] it wont matter if the kernel adds hypeinated flags in the futrue. there are a number that have undercosres which is why im not sure they wont add ones with - https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/43539/what-do-the-flags-in-proc-cpuinfo-mean
14:49:37	sean-k-mooney	oh possible aes-ni
14:51:16	sean-k-mooney	ah no that is shortened to just ase
14:51:21	sean-k-mooney	*aes
14:52:30	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: Yep; note: strip(+) will strip it from the beginning and end. *Not* from the middle
14:54:43	sean-k-mooney	ah it does have that limitation
14:54:53	sean-k-mooney	that is different then other languages
14:54:54	kashyap	Anyway; can do the sliced index
14:57:01	sean-k-mooney	https://docs.python.org/3/library/stdtypes.html#str.strip i was expectin git to work more like sub but i guess that makes sense i have used ti to strip leading and trailing whitespace before
14:57:14	sean-k-mooney	and i knew it maintained that
14:57:46	sean-k-mooney	by the way im not against implementing this i just want use to do the paperwork correctly
14:58:25	sean-k-mooney	so basically add it to the adgendar for next weeks nova meeting and get the bp approved for wallby if the core team agrees
15:01:37	gibi	kashyap, sean-k-mooney: yepp that bp needs an approval, but honestly it is pretty late in the cycle. we past M2 so if it is not super urgent to fix some bad situation somewhere then I don't think it fits in Wallaby. We have 18 approved bps and I think we will only have time to finish like maybe 2/3 of it
15:02:53	kashyap	gibi: It does fix a major problem
15:03:01	kashyap	gibi: I'll explain in a bit; running a meeting
15:03:01	gibi	is it a bug?
15:03:05	gibi	ack
15:06:23	sean-k-mooney	gibi: a downtream one basically a kernel abi break
15:06:50	sean-k-mooney	though it wont nessisarly fix it it just will help prevent new people form hitting it
15:06:55	kashyap	sean-k-mooney: Not just downstream
15:06:58	kashyap	Affects upstream too

Earlier   Later