| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-12-02 | |||
| 12:21:50 | sean-k-mooney | its not | |
| 12:22:03 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: i miss read it i tought it was adding os-brick | |
| 12:22:28 | sean-k-mooney | not adding the branchi missed that because of the comment | |
| 12:22:51 | sean-k-mooney | actully its also using the explit fully quallifed version which we shoudl revert | |
| 12:23:15 | sean-k-mooney | opendev.org/openstack/os-brick make it harder for third party cis | |
| 12:23:20 | opendevreview | Alexey Stupnikov proposed openstack/nova master: Don't ignore InstanceNotFound exception by libvirt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/863665 | |
| 12:24:31 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Revert "Revert resize: wait for events according to hybrid plug" https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/828419 | |
| 12:25:31 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Revert "[stable-only] Use os-brick from source in wallaby" https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866454 | |
| 12:25:46 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: ^ bauzas ^ | |
| 12:26:32 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: the other disadvantage of the patch we just merged is i think override-branch: takes precidence over depneds on but not 100% sure about that | |
| 12:29:36 | opendevreview | Alexey Stupnikov proposed openstack/nova master: Don't ignore InstanceNotFound exception by libvirt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/863665 | |
| 12:32:26 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: thanks, +2'd | |
| 12:33:31 | sean-k-mooney | whoami-rajat: ^ just so you are aware we are reverting that patch since we already had an equivlanet merged | |
| 12:35:13 | opendevreview | Alexey Stupnikov proposed openstack/nova master: Don't ignore InstanceNotFound exception by libvirt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/863665 | |
| 12:54:38 | whoami-rajat | sean-k-mooney, not sure what's the reason of revert since the gate on devstack is still broken with existing changes -- as mentioned in my commit message | |
| 12:55:05 | whoami-rajat | which my patch intended to fix | |
| 12:57:38 | opendevreview | Alexey Stupnikov proposed openstack/nova master: Log some InstanceNotFound exceptions from libvirt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/863665 | |
| 13:01:14 | elodilles | whoami-rajat: are you sure? | |
| 13:01:43 | whoami-rajat | elodilles, well, it was broken when i proposed the patch, checking again | |
| 13:01:59 | elodilles | whoami-rajat: our fix landed on Nov 22nd, ~ 7 pm | |
| 13:02:21 | sean-k-mooney | whoami-rajat: the two shoudl mostly be the same exactp you are forcing the branch to be stable/wallaby | |
| 13:02:41 | sean-k-mooney | which is the default that will be used by zuul on the stable brnach | |
| 13:03:11 | sean-k-mooney | the only other change is you are explcitly referncing the connection that provides the repo | |
| 13:04:31 | whoami-rajat | ah i see now | |
| 13:05:12 | whoami-rajat | the gate report on this is 11:49 (my time) 22nd november | |
| 13:05:35 | whoami-rajat | and the patch you've referenced merged 11:48 22nd november https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/865134 | |
| 13:06:15 | whoami-rajat | let's see if the gate is green on devstack after the revert | |
| 13:54:41 | bauzas | whoami-rajat: sean-k-mooney: elodilles: sorry was doing other things | |
| 13:54:45 | bauzas | +Wd the revert | |
| 13:55:07 | bauzas | thanks elodilles for the spotting, gtk that by default we don't use a release | |
| 14:00:59 | sean-k-mooney | if you add it to requried project it add it to devstackts LIBS_FROM_GIT config option | |
| 14:01:14 | sean-k-mooney | and it also make zuul prepare the git repo in the corerct location | |
| 14:01:22 | sean-k-mooney | inclduing resloveing any depends on | |
| 14:01:41 | sean-k-mooney | by default the same branch as the job will be used for the branch of any required proejct | |
| 14:02:02 | sean-k-mooney | so branch-override is only need for thinks like tempest athat are branchless | |
| 15:37:22 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Revert "[stable-only] Use os-brick from source in wallaby" https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866454 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2022-12-03 | |||
| 01:29:06 | opendevreview | Takashi Natsume proposed openstack/placement master: Move implemented specs for Xena and Yoga release https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/853730 | |
| 01:29:17 | opendevreview | Takashi Natsume proposed openstack/placement master: Fix a wrong assertion method https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/861489 | |
| 05:39:15 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/yoga: Retry attachment delete API call for 504 Gateway Timeout https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/849212 | |
| 13:11:21 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Adds check for VM snapshot fail while quiesce https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/852171 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2022-12-05 | |||
| 10:54:04 | opendevreview | Maksim Malchuk proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: Fix to implement 'pack' or 'spread' VM's NUMA cells https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/829804 | |
| 14:33:42 | gibi | bauzas: fyi I cannot join to the tomorrow's nova meeting | |
| 14:34:11 | bauzas | gibi: ack | |
| 15:06:46 | bauzas | gibi: you may be interested in merging the stable/xena branch from https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864932/4 :) | |
| 15:08:04 | sean-k-mooney | once the xena version are merged ill update the wallaby versions with the new cherry-picked lines | |
| 15:08:28 | gibi | bauzas: sorry I have to get back to this | |
| 15:08:35 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: ahha, I was about to ping you for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/865334 | |
| 15:11:01 | dansmith | bauzas: it would be great if we could have this merged before I disappear for the year: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/863152 | |
| 15:11:16 | bauzas | dansmith: ack, I'll look | |
| 15:14:45 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: i think you said you had a poc of that somewhere. did you push it for reveiw | |
| 15:15:03 | sean-k-mooney | i know you will be on PTO soon but we can at least start on teh review while your away | |
| 15:15:23 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: yes: https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:bp%252Fstable-compute-uuid | |
| 15:15:48 | dansmith | as I mentioned, there are two tests in there that are failing because they assert that we recreate compute nodes, which this makes us not do | |
| 15:15:50 | sean-k-mooney | oh ok i missed that then ill try and review it before i finish for the year | |
| 15:16:08 | dansmith | so I left them as failing so that you can see that, and will go back and update the tests (of course) | |
| 15:16:24 | sean-k-mooney | ya you mentioned that the current fixutre for restarting the compute service was problematic | |
| 15:16:35 | sean-k-mooney | ack | |
| 15:16:40 | dansmith | yes, but I think I've fixed that | |
| 15:17:10 | dansmith | the failing tests are just because the test confirms that we re-create a compute node, but with this code, we re-find the old one | |
| 15:17:46 | dansmith | it's been sitting a month at this point so I don't fully remember, and I'll be even more hazy in Jan, but will pick it up then :) | |
| 15:17:56 | sean-k-mooney | ack i think in the long run that is proably more correct anyway (refinding them) | |
| 15:18:37 | dansmith | that's the point of the work, yeah :) | |
| 15:18:50 | dansmith | (well one of the points) | |
| 15:19:05 | dansmith | it avoids the stale/broken placement allocations and such | |
| 15:19:40 | sean-k-mooney | well i think (would have to check) we were reusing the uuid or soemthign liek tha tso that the palcement side was correct | |
| 15:19:50 | bauzas | dansmith: sent to the gate | |
| 15:19:51 | sean-k-mooney | in the funtional tests | |
| 15:19:58 | sean-k-mooney | but thanks for the context | |
| 15:20:05 | bauzas | dansmith: thanks for having added some paragraphs | |
| 15:20:46 | dansmith | bauzas: thanks | |
| 15:21:09 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: in the ironic case we are I think, not sure about the regular case | |
| 15:21:42 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: in the case of a host rename, we don't find the old provider by name (because our name changed) so we re-create everything right? | |
| 15:21:55 | sean-k-mooney | i think the way the current recreate worked we were not actully creating a new compute node record in the db | |
| 15:22:20 | sean-k-mooney | * how it worked in teh functional tests | |
| 15:22:37 | dansmith | okay I'm talking about in real life | |
| 15:23:18 | sean-k-mooney | ya so in real life the lookup can fail in one of two ways | |
| 15:23:35 | sean-k-mooney | either the host value does not match adn we create a new compute service entry | |
| 15:23:55 | sean-k-mooney | or the hypervior_hostname does not match and we delete and recreate teh compute node record | |
| 15:24:27 | dansmith | neither will match on a libvirt host that has renamed right? | |
| 15:24:32 | sean-k-mooney | so if the host value changes the service entry gets recreated and if the hypervior_hostname mismatches its the compute node | |
| 15:24:53 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: if you have notihgn set in the config then yes | |
| 15:25:12 | dansmith | ah, right | |
| 15:25:26 | sean-k-mooney | ooo at least hardcodes the host value | |
| 15:25:39 | sean-k-mooney | so if the hostname change and the config is not updated then it will find the service | |
| 15:25:48 | sean-k-mooney | then delete the compute node and recreate it | |
| 15:27:36 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: yeah I guess we need to make sure we have those cases covered in the tests.. "host renamed, no config set" and "host renamed, config set to something" | |
| 15:28:34 | sean-k-mooney | i think we can emulate that by mocking the driver method to get the host name and config flags at least at a unit test level | |
| 15:28:52 | sean-k-mooney | for functional tests we could proably do it too but only with one compute node sicne the config is shared | |
| 15:29:24 | sean-k-mooney | but yes i agree i dont know if we need to test all 4 combination but proably woudl not hurt | |
| 15:30:06 | admin1 | is there a good rescue image (os ) for openstack .. that kind of boots directly without login/pass for rescue ? | |
| 15:32:39 | sean-k-mooney | well by default the same image the vm is booted with is used for rescue | |
| 15:33:00 | sean-k-mooney | but any of the images you woudl use on a phsyical host will be good | |
| 15:33:16 | sean-k-mooney | like KNOPPIX | |
| 15:33:17 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Add stable-compute-uuid spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/863152 | |
| 15:34:37 | sean-k-mooney | it actully would proably have made sense to allow a keypair to be specifed for rescue | |
| 15:35:05 | sean-k-mooney | although the assumtion was the tenant would do rescue so that why we reuse the one the vm is booted with | |
| 15:36:13 | sean-k-mooney | admin1: if you are doing this on behalf of a tenatn what i would recommend is creating a iamge yourself and baking in a set of ssh keys and then usign that to rescue tenant vms | |
| 17:03:54 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/xena: refactor: remove duplicated logic https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864932 | |
| 17:04:00 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/xena: Record SRIOV PF MAC in the binding profile https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864933 | |
| 17:04:07 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/xena: Remove double mocking https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864934 | |