Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2023-01-05
20:06:48 sean-k-mooney so if you run the test with OS_DEBUG maybe there is somethign breaking in the restart
20:07:36 sean-k-mooney i only see info logs in the output you pasted so fi this is from a functional test then you might need OS_DEBUG=1
20:08:14 dansmith sure enough: Host 'host1' is not mapped to any cell
20:08:17 sean-k-mooney although if it was broken that way i woudl expect to see some trace backs or Error logs so debug should not be required
20:09:53 dansmith OS_DEBUG changed lately btw
20:10:03 dansmith I used to set OS_DEBUG=y but that doesn't work anymore
20:10:12 dansmith is =1 the new magic?
20:11:06 sean-k-mooney i have always used 1 but not sure if/when that changed
20:11:19 sean-k-mooney i dont think its every really been documented properly
20:14:46 dansmith yeah
20:14:51 dansmith =y generates an exception now
20:16:45 sean-k-mooney i assuem its anythign loosely equivalent to true in a c like language
20:17:52 sean-k-mooney for the cell mappings stuff i dont think we normally run discovier hosts explictly anywhere in our funct tests
20:18:13 dansmith I didn't either, which is why it seems weird to me that it fails like that
20:18:22 dansmith maybe we insert the mapping in start but not in restart?
20:18:27 dansmith anyway,
20:18:32 dansmith I'll leave that as s #FIXME for later
20:18:33 sean-k-mooney it might be burried in some of the compute create code but ill admit i have neverlooked
20:18:57 sean-k-mooney you could always cheat with the conductor periodic if you needed to in the short term
20:19:05 sean-k-mooney anywya im going to call it a day soon
20:19:22 dansmith if I don't verify the new rp I'll make it past
20:20:05 sean-k-mooney i dont see how the cell mappings stuff could impact the palcment part by the way. what was the exception you got?
20:20:41 sean-k-mooney the cell mappiing shoudl only affect calling the comptue service via rpc
20:21:42 sean-k-mooney so the rp thing most be somethign else
20:53:13 dansmith it impacts the placement stuff only in the verification in the tests, because we use hypervisors to find the rp uuid and then check the allocations
20:53:23 dansmith if I just don't do that validation (like other parts of the test) them I'm good
#openstack-nova - 2023-01-06
02:35:16 opendevreview Nobuhiro MIKI proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add PXB support for libvirt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/869416
11:03:28 opendevreview Aaron S proposed openstack/nova master: Add further workaround features for qemu_monitor_announce_self https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867324
14:46:26 stephenfin gibi: No point rechecking jobs that exhibit this failure
14:46:34 stephenfin tox.tox_env.python.api.NoInterpreter: could not find python interpreter matching any of the specs functional-py39
14:46:36 gibi ahh
14:46:40 stephenfin it's another tox 4 bug
14:46:44 gibi nice
14:46:50 stephenfin https://github.com/tox-dev/tox/issues/2811
14:47:31 gibi what can we do?
14:47:32 stephenfin I've happened to expose it by fixing another bug that resulted in us using the wrong interpreter version
14:47:38 stephenfin :(
14:48:06 sean-k-mooney i have been seeing it since before you fix
14:48:23 sean-k-mooney but ya all the gates are currently blocked
14:48:29 stephenfin yeah, most likely on projects without base_python set
14:49:13 sean-k-mooney i saw it on nova yesterday and i think on older builds form durign the week
14:49:18 sean-k-mooney we have base_python set
14:49:43 sean-k-mooney we dont actully need to have it set anymore since we are python3 only
14:49:47 stephenfin the fix to tox merged yesterday so it was probably that
14:50:19 sean-k-mooney ya the release happend 19 hours ago but i toughthe builds were older then that
14:50:26 sean-k-mooney i saw it on gibis seriese
14:51:23 sean-k-mooney im wondering if we shoudl repin to tox <4.0 tempoerally
14:52:02 sean-k-mooney we can proably wait another week but if we cant resolve the issue by the end of next week i think we should
14:59:10 gibi sean-k-mooney, stephenfin: is there a mail thread about the gate block on the ML yet or should I send one?
14:59:35 stephenfin There isn't. The fix is here https://github.com/tox-dev/tox/pull/2828 though if you want to send one and point to that
14:59:59 gibi I will send one
15:01:35 dansmith sean-k-mooney: tox has been slowly breaking everything for weeks now.. pinning to <4 temporarily seems futile
15:08:57 sean-k-mooney dansmith: im currently trying to fix some os-vif tox issues related to ubuntu 22.04
15:09:26 sean-k-mooney 4.0 is after that on my list
15:16:24 sean-k-mooney dansmith: we had a pin in place until recently to prevent the gate block
15:16:51 dansmith yeah and we're pinning on stable, I'm just saying I don't think _temporarily_ pinning and expecting things to stabilize is realistic
15:16:57 sean-k-mooney i understand why they remvoed it but i dont think we shoudl block the gate while we are fixing it
15:17:12 dansmith it's not like they broke a bunch of backwards compat in 4.0 and now things are stable.. they *keep* breaking things
15:18:03 dansmith also for the reason that tox will auto-upgrade itself in certain scenarios (which is like ....)
15:18:09 sean-k-mooney i havent really had issue wiht tox but also havnt been using it much in the last while as i have not been really coding in python for a few months
15:18:38 sean-k-mooney dansmith: apprently you can force it to install iseslf in a venv and use that version to run things
15:18:53 dansmith sean-k-mooney: it will do that itself if it decides to
15:19:02 dansmith but only the latest, not a specific version
15:19:34 sean-k-mooney not according to Brian Rosmaita's latest email
15:19:56 sean-k-mooney you can force the version via requires in tox.ini
15:20:19 dansmith " it doesn't ensure that the available tox is that version."
15:20:54 dansmith oh, there's two pins, with different behaviors
15:21:13 dansmith he's talking about requires, but there are projects with ensure
15:22:17 dansmith it's really a mess
15:23:08 sean-k-mooney yep
15:23:32 sean-k-mooney the reason i was suggestign we wait a week is at that poitn we would be 4 weeks form FF
15:23:45 sean-k-mooney and dont really wnat to still have the gates blocked by this at that point
15:24:15 sean-k-mooney i.e. lets see if we can fix it next week and if not pin it so we can continue merging things and work on it in parallel
18:02:23 sean-k-mooney gmann: stephenfin i have got the os-vif fucntional test workign locally
18:03:06 sean-k-mooney it looks like we need CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE on ubuntu 22.04
18:03:36 sean-k-mooney without that vsctl and some other commands fail
18:03:46 sean-k-mooney CAP_NET_ADMIN used to work
18:04:00 sean-k-mooney i have some other chagne locally so im going to see if they are required or not
18:04:51 sean-k-mooney its proably because i am not a meber of the openvswitch group but it also fails for ip link commands
18:05:16 sean-k-mooney so i think this has to do with disto packaging and how the goups are configured
18:05:37 sean-k-mooney so while i dont like adding CAP_DAC_OVERRIED that is proably what we will need to do
18:06:44 sean-k-mooney what im less happy about is this is only required when using the vsctl ovs backend which is deprecated
18:07:07 sean-k-mooney so i might us a diffferent privsep context based on the driver to limit the scope of the change.
18:20:38 sean-k-mooney actully i think the cahnge is less in vasive then that and only in the test code
18:34:20 opendevreview sean mooney proposed openstack/os-vif master: add CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE to test privsep contexts https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/869500
18:35:59 sean-k-mooney gibi: stephenfin gmann ^ i think that will fix the functional job and unblock https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/868420 and https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/861468
18:36:29 sean-k-mooney once we have those 3 commits merged we may want to consider an os-vif release
18:54:32 gmann sean-k-mooney: thanks, will keep eyes on gate result
19:09:25 darkhorse Hi team, I would like to resize an shelved_offloaded instance. The use case is that when an instance with pci device is shelved_offloaded and the device is broken, it fails to unshelve. However, as a user, I would like to recover my data in the instance so I would like to change the flavor with a new one that does not have pci cards.
19:09:49 darkhorse Is there a quick workaround to this?
19:10:05 darkhorse Thank you in advance for any help!
19:19:35 opendevreview Danylo Vodopianov proposed openstack/nova master: Napatech SmartNIC support https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/859577
19:24:52 dansmith melwitt: around?
19:35:01 melwitt dansmith: o/
19:35:17 dansmith hey so,
19:35:32 dansmith I don't really know what I was going to say
19:35:46 dansmith part of it was that now that I've implemented compute undelete later in the series,
19:35:51 dansmith I'm failing a couple more regression tests,
19:36:09 dansmith but around ironic because of all the hash ring rebalance weirdness
19:36:24 dansmith unfortunately I think those are going to have to change a bit as well, which makes me nervous,

Earlier   Later