| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-03-10 | |||
| 17:48:04 | bauzas | and other services also have to understand the new minimum version | |
| 17:48:08 | sean-k-mooney | yep that is more or less what i was assuming regarding supproting both | |
| 17:48:14 | bauzas | if they get the object | |
| 17:48:23 | bauzas | I mean, if they rehydrate it | |
| 17:48:56 | dansmith | yup | |
| 17:48:59 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: which ovo object are you considering to bump ? | |
| 17:49:11 | sean-k-mooney | its somewhat bounded now that we have the check for min compute service version now | |
| 17:49:14 | bauzas | computenode is also used by a lot of services, hence my concern | |
| 17:49:28 | sean-k-mooney | e.g. that it now enforce n+1 max delta | |
| 17:49:49 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: well im not nessisaly suggesting we do that one next cycle | |
| 17:49:58 | sean-k-mooney | just trying to figure out when we are allowed too | |
| 17:50:03 | bauzas | yup, gotcha | |
| 17:50:22 | bauzas | should we now discuss about raising the API minimums, just for the fun ? | |
| 17:50:33 | bauzas | REST* APIs | |
| 17:50:43 | bauzas | :) | |
| 17:50:58 | sean-k-mooney | well we have a todo to stop declaring the numa_toplogy object as a stign adn declar it as an ovo filed | |
| 17:50:59 | dansmith | bauzas: it is, but not passed around between them as much right? | |
| 17:51:01 | sean-k-mooney | form like juno | |
| 17:51:26 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: so remove in 2.0 came up when i review artoms patchs | |
| 17:51:38 | sean-k-mooney | which is why it was on my mind since we addded anouther one of those comments | |
| 17:52:05 | bauzas | dansmith: trying to think about it | |
| 17:52:18 | bauzas | dansmith: as a nested object, can't promise it isn't used | |
| 17:52:37 | sean-k-mooney | give that todo is 5 years old https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/ab07507e5cfce6232fef373d07ff92ea704541da/nova/objects/compute_node.py#L84-L86 | |
| 17:52:37 | dansmith | what other object includes computenode in it? | |
| 17:52:48 | bauzas | good question | |
| 17:53:03 | dansmith | bauzas: you said "as a nested object" ... | |
| 17:53:45 | bauzas | dansmith: the Service object at least, I remember writing the nesting | |
| 17:54:03 | dansmith | okay but I don't think that gets passed around either | |
| 17:54:10 | bauzas | hah, and the RequestSpec one | |
| 17:54:21 | dansmith | reqspec has computenode in it? | |
| 17:54:25 | bauzas | the SchedulerRetries one | |
| 17:54:47 | bauzas | it has a list of cn objects in it | |
| 17:55:01 | sean-k-mooney | do we use that any more | |
| 17:55:07 | bauzas | which itself is nested in the spec object | |
| 17:55:09 | sean-k-mooney | i tought we dont do retreis since placment | |
| 17:55:17 | sean-k-mooney | we use alternate hosts | |
| 17:55:33 | dansmith | that seems weird because those are from different DBs, but maybe we just jam them in there to pass around for the retries? | |
| 17:56:09 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: we should check if its still needed i think that might have been for when we used the retryfilter | |
| 17:56:12 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: good point, it's no longer used | |
| 17:56:19 | dansmith | yeah | |
| 17:56:34 | dansmith | well, I certainly hadn't remembered that we do that, but changing it would mean more bumps, so.. | |
| 17:56:41 | dansmith | however, | |
| 17:56:51 | dansmith | I'm not sure it's really likely to be a problem | |
| 17:57:04 | dansmith | it's sourced from the control services, so if they put 1.x in there until everyone is upgraded, | |
| 17:57:06 | dansmith | it should be fine | |
| 17:57:56 | sean-k-mooney | ya again just raised this because i was trying to under stand when we can adress the Do X in next major version comments that are in some objects | |
| 17:58:07 | sean-k-mooney | many of which have been there for years at this point | |
| 18:01:40 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/1337890ace918fa2555046c01c8624be014ce2d8 was the instance one so i guess reviewing that is a good start. | |
| 18:02:46 | sean-k-mooney | oh ya i rembere the obj_relationships stuff | |
| 18:05:05 | sean-k-mooney | oh i see we had a _BaseInstance and InstanceV1 and InstanceV2 class for a cycle kind of like the proxy for rpc | |
| 18:06:18 | sean-k-mooney | then that patch actully drop V1 after we were shoudl everytin supported v2 | |
| 18:07:47 | sean-k-mooney | i vaguely remeber this happening https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/713d8cb0777afb9fe4f665b9a40cac894b04aacb added 2 objects. | |
| 19:18:04 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: add constants for vnic type vdpa https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/770474 | |
| 19:18:04 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: objects: Add 'VDPA' to 'PciDeviceType' https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/777481 | |
| 19:18:05 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add vDPA nodedev parsing https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/770533 | |
| 19:18:05 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add guest generation for vDPA https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/770532 | |
| 19:18:06 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: pci: Add vDPA vnic to PCI request mapping and filtering https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/778350 | |
| 19:18:07 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: add hw:mlock extra spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/778347 | |
| 19:18:08 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Move PCI host device parsing to 'host' https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/779851 | |
| 19:18:11 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: there you go | |
| 19:22:49 | sean-k-mooney | thanks. ill take a look and test it out shortly. | |
| 19:31:18 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: objects: Add 'VDPA' to 'PciDeviceType' https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/777481 | |
| 19:31:18 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Move PCI host device parsing to 'host' https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/779851 | |
| 19:31:19 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add vDPA nodedev parsing https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/770533 | |
| 19:31:20 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add guest generation for vDPA https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/770532 | |
| 19:31:21 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: pci: Add vDPA vnic to PCI request mapping and filtering https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/778350 | |
| 19:31:21 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: add hw:mlock extra spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/778347 | |
| 20:12:54 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: libvirt: Stop passing around virt_type, caps https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/775689 | |
| 20:13:31 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add missing type hints https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/775688 | |
| 20:23:14 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: Support per port numa policies with SR-IOV https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/773792 | |
| 20:24:45 | sean-k-mooney | artom: ^ im having troble getting the socket test i addded here working https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/773792/10/nova/tests/functional/libvirt/test_pci_sriov_servers.py#1254 | |
| 20:31:28 | artom | sean-k-mooney, I wonder if it's because I set the 'socket' attribute on the pools in my filter method | |
| 20:31:45 | artom | And the pools that get passed to remove_device() don't have it | |
| 20:31:54 | artom | So it fails the equality test | |
| 20:32:23 | sean-k-mooney | its there in the host state object {"physnets": [], "tunneled": false}, "nova_object.changes": ["physnets", "tunneled"]}, "socket": 1}, | |
| 20:32:58 | sean-k-mooney | actully ill copy this to pastbin that not waht i wanted | |
| 20:34:04 | sean-k-mooney | http://paste.openstack.org/show/803443/ | |
| 20:34:09 | artom | Hrmm, yeah, if I add: | |
| 20:34:09 | artom | del pool_keys['devices'] | |
| 20:34:09 | artom | if 'socket' in pool_keys: | |
| 20:34:09 | artom | del pool_keys['socket'] | |
| 20:34:22 | artom | In _find_pool() | |
| 20:34:25 | artom | It makes the tests pass | |
| 20:34:28 | artom | OK, I have to run | |
| 20:34:37 | artom | Hopefully that helped a little bit, talk in ~1 hour | |
| 20:35:19 | sean-k-mooney | ok ya that might be the issue | |
| 20:36:17 | sean-k-mooney | but if it is your current patch might break neutron sriov ports? ill do some testing locally and try and see if its just a functest issue or a real one | |
| 20:37:34 | sean-k-mooney | the other polices do work however so i dont know it might just be an edgecase i need to fix to make both work correctly | |
| 20:38:07 | artom | I suspect it's a logic error in my patches | |
| 20:38:17 | artom | Though I do wonder how come my own functional tests passed...? | |
| 21:15:44 | sean-k-mooney | artom: i get the error on real hardware too. | |
| 21:31:08 | artom | sean-k-mooney, I wonder if if has something to do with VFs and PFs? | |
| 21:34:01 | sean-k-mooney | im not sure | |
| 21:34:12 | sean-k-mooney | did you test your code on real hardware | |
| 21:35:47 | sean-k-mooney | hum if i do some hacking in /sys to put all my nics on numa 0 i can boot again | |
| 21:36:20 | sean-k-mooney | basiclly echo 0 | sudo tee /sys/class/net/eth*/device/numa_node | |
| 21:36:34 | sean-k-mooney | then stop nova compute and libvirt fully and start them again | |
| 21:36:39 | artom | I didn't | |
| 21:37:06 | sean-k-mooney | when that was -1 it was failing i hadd to add pool_keys.pop('socket', None) | |
| 21:37:16 | sean-k-mooney | to find_pool | |