Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2022-05-12
11:22:59 gibi yes
11:23:01 gibi for all tree
11:23:03 gibi three
11:23:22 gibi in an overallocation situation inventory can change but allocation cannot
11:23:28 gibi except removal
11:23:35 gibi so you can delete allocations
11:25:47 gibi and yes evac is special as it needs to modify the single allocation of the VM
11:27:09 gibi hm but non evacuation also needs to move the VM allocation from the VM uuid to the migration uuid so that would fail too in an overallocation
11:27:33 gibi this is suboptimal as it prevents cleaning up an overallocated host by moving VMs out
11:28:07 gibi so I would temporary remove the overallocation by bumping allocation ratio high up, move the VMs out, and then restore the allocation ratio
11:28:51 sean-k-mooney ya that is the workaround for now
11:29:13 sean-k-mooney ideally we woudl mvoe to useing the migration object to track either the source or dest allcoations
11:29:39 sean-k-mooney im not sure bauzas case was related to evac
11:29:44 sean-k-mooney we can see when they are back
11:30:25 gibi and we would also need to special case the allocation update that only change consumer uuid, in placement to be allowed even in overallocated situation
11:39:35 gibi yepp, I checked decreasing allocation is rejected, but deleting allocation is accepted in overallocation case
12:37:27 opendevreview Pavlo Shchelokovskyy proposed openstack/nova master: Sort PCI devices by their address https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/830136
14:09:13 opendevreview Alexey Stupnikov proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Test aborting queued live migration https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841483
14:15:39 opendevreview Hervé Beraud proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Fix typo https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/841600
14:17:38 opendevreview Hervé Beraud proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Fix typo https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/841600
16:09:44 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Fix typo https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/841600
16:54:06 opendevreview Gorka Eguileor proposed openstack/nova master: Fix extending non LUKSv1 encrypted volumes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/836064
16:58:11 geguileo stephenfin: I had to change the commit message, could you +2 it again, please: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/836064
16:58:34 geguileo sean-k-mooney: ^
16:58:36 stephenfin done
16:58:45 geguileo stephenfin: wow, that was quick, thanks :-)
17:22:25 sean-k-mooney geguileo: ill take a look again shortly too
17:22:41 sean-k-mooney ah stephen put it back in the gate
17:22:43 sean-k-mooney cool
17:32:15 mnaser sean-k-mooney: do you think the `hw:mlock` thing deserves a full-on spec as well if we want to do that as well?
17:33:45 mnaser (i.e. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/778347)
17:33:59 mnaser if so, i can try and ask ricolin to work on that as well
17:34:31 sean-k-mooney technically its a seperate feature which could be a seperate spec but im ok to combine the to unless others want it split out
17:35:14 sean-k-mooney i can unabandone that if you like if ricolin wants to take over the patch
17:36:07 sean-k-mooney my inital patch technically does not enfoce that you ahve a mem_page_size
17:36:16 sean-k-mooney so it can lead to OOM issues
17:36:23 sean-k-mooney but it was functional
17:37:04 sean-k-mooney it looks like artom and stephenfin had a prference for hw:locked_memory instead of hw:mlock
17:37:12 sean-k-mooney so it proably makes sense to at least make that change
17:37:52 sean-k-mooney i was ment ot re review the viommu spec today too sorry ricolin
17:38:21 sean-k-mooney ill try and get back to it tomorrow but likely wont get to it today
18:15:07 opendevreview Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: DNM: Testing stuff https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841626
23:29:13 ricolin sean-k-mooney: yeah, I can help with the mlock patch, and thanks for your review:)
#openstack-nova - 2022-05-13
07:04:10 opendevreview Wenping Song proposed openstack/os-traits master: Update python testing as per zed cycle testing runtime https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-traits/+/841682
08:42:20 opendevreview Wenping Song proposed openstack/placement master: Update python testing as per zed cycle testing runtime https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/841690
08:42:39 opendevreview Wenping Song proposed openstack/placement master: Update python testing as per zed cycle testing runtime https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/841690
09:20:32 opendevreview Wenping Song proposed openstack/os-resource-classes master: Update python testing as per zed cycle testing runtime https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-resource-classes/+/841700
09:46:43 opendevreview Wenping Song proposed openstack/os-resource-classes master: Update python testing as per zed cycle testing runtime https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-resource-classes/+/841700
10:12:03 sean-k-mooney ricolin: +1 on the spec
10:12:23 sean-k-mooney ricolin: i have resotred the mlock patch too so feel free to updated it
10:12:29 ricolin thanks sean-k-mooney :)
10:15:28 sean-k-mooney ricolin: if you adress the extra spec name im baicly +2 ill read over it again when you respin but no rush
10:24:09 opendevreview Rico Lin proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add vIOMMU device support for libvirt driver https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/840310
10:25:12 ricolin sean-k-mooney: done ^^^ :)
10:28:37 sean-k-mooney +2 :) am milestone 1 i think is thursday. assuming gibi or others approve the spec can you submit the patch to os-traits to add the traits
10:28:55 sean-k-mooney if we merge that before tursday then the traits can be included in the m1 relases of os-traits
10:30:37 sean-k-mooney nova's unit tests need the traits to be in a release version of os-traits to pass if its not merge by then its not really a big deal we will just do another release whenever they land and the nova code look good to merge
10:51:22 stephenfin sean-k-mooney: gibi: melwitt: Reviewed that PCI in placement spec. Looks pretty good, though I'm convinced you're making an unnecessary rod for your own back in trying to port that dynamic PF/VF logic to placement land ;-)
11:00:54 sean-k-mooney stephenfin: ya it is complicating things
11:01:15 sean-k-mooney stephenfin: that use case is really only for sriov nics
11:01:23 sean-k-mooney as in for neuton ports
11:01:31 sean-k-mooney i dont think it really exists for pci alias
11:02:09 sean-k-mooney so we can kind of punt. technialy it applise to the alias too but i dont think that is a common usecase there
11:02:45 sean-k-mooney stephenfin: you might want to look over ricolin's spec for the viommu support
11:02:51 sean-k-mooney its pretty short
11:03:17 sean-k-mooney https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/840310
11:04:00 stephenfin sure
11:06:36 gibi stephenfin: so you suggest that deciding to whitelist either the PF or its VFs are rarely used? I think the opposite. It is so easy to just whitelist everthing under 0000:81:* both PF and VF, without thingking to much, and then start using the compute for both direct and direct-physical ports, it just works, so I think there is a lot of deployment out there that might not need to whitelist both but
11:06:42 gibi they did
11:07:44 gibi if we start rejecting such config there will be a lot of pain figuring out a whitelist in these deployments that matches the current consumption
11:08:10 sean-k-mooney im not sure really. im tempted to say perhaps we sould only support that if you are not trackign devices in placment
11:08:45 sean-k-mooney and in the mvp implement supprot for only tracking deivces as PFs or VFs
11:09:03 sean-k-mooney and then we could add the mixed suport after if needed
11:09:04 stephenfin No, I'm suggesting people wanting to use both 'direct' and 'direct-physical' on a single host is likely rare. I think it's reasonable to insist that users that use wildcard device addresses (or vendor/device IDs) choose whether they want to consume the VFs or PFs
11:09:47 sean-k-mooney stephenfin: well your suggestiong they make that dissionc staticaly at deployment time
11:09:56 stephenfin At the moment, a user can dynamically choose whether they consume the PF or one or more of the VFs. I think moving to a static model makes sense now
11:09:59 stephenfin Yup
11:10:01 sean-k-mooney rather then dynmical as workloads are schulded
11:10:05 stephenfin exactly
11:10:32 sean-k-mooney i think pf passhtough is much less common then vf
11:10:39 gibi I have no problems forcing this to new deployments, but I still believe upgrade will be a pain
11:11:07 stephenfin *borderline non-existent (I say, with no actual evidence either way :) However, it seems like an odd thing to do, especially when we don't support nested virt)
11:11:10 gibi but yeah, we can push out the pain to the future by keepin the pci tracking in placement optional
11:11:57 sean-k-mooney stephenfin: well my evidence is that live migrtation, cold migration and unshelve have basicaly been broken since the feature was added until like 2 cylces ago
11:11:59 stephenfin I mean, it's been more than three years and people can still avoid tracking of pinned CPUs in placement
11:12:20 stephenfin so that can can be kicked endlessly down the road
11:12:44 sean-k-mooney so while i know we have some customer using PFs those custoemr also have static deployments
11:13:28 sean-k-mooney gibi: i guess its really up to you
11:13:36 sean-k-mooney if you want to include it in the mvp
11:13:40 gibi OK, I see an agreement forming. Let's implement PCI tracking with placement without the dynamic selection. Keep the everything working as today if the PCI tracking in placement is disabled
11:13:48 sean-k-mooney i think it could be a patch at the end of the seirse by the way
11:14:36 sean-k-mooney gibi: sound good to me that means the prefilter will not have an auto mode
11:14:42 gibi then when everythin (except the dynamic thing works with placemnet) deprecate the old way
11:14:46 gibi and wait for feedback
11:15:18 gibi yeah that means no auto mode
11:15:28 sean-k-mooney you will opt in on the compute with the new config option and opt in on schduler by enabling prefilter
11:15:29 gibi operator needs to first enable tracking in the compute config
11:15:36 gibi then enable prefiltering in the scheduler
11:15:41 sean-k-mooney yep
11:16:31 gibi and if somebody only opt in on a set of computes then enables the prefilter then we say sorry you lost the non enabled computes from the PCI scheduling

Earlier   Later