| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2023-04-19 | |||
| 13:16:23 | auniyal | some of them are good to merge | |
| 13:26:49 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: hyperv: Mark driver as experimental https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/863910 | |
| 13:36:03 | artom | auniyal, I'm not a core :) | |
| 14:41:12 | opendevreview | Takashi Natsume proposed openstack/nova master: Update contributor guide for 2023.2 Bobcat https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/876447 | |
| 15:07:46 | IPO | Hello All. xena will be on EM soon. Could you please review https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/876474 ? | |
| 15:08:36 | IPO | Sorry, this one: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/829804 | |
| 15:14:44 | elodilles | IPO: nova has already released its final xena release, and actually the xena-em transition patch is also about to merge. (note that patches can be merged after the transition as well, just upstream releases cannot be done anymore) | |
| 15:36:08 | IPO | I see. Thank you for info. So is there any chance to merge ? | |
| 15:39:51 | IPO | I mean "note that patches can be merged after the transition as well" cover only security patches ? | |
| 15:41:24 | elodilles | IPO: every bug fix can be merged after the Extended Maintenance transition as well - until the branch will be xena-eol tagged (End-of-Life) and deleted | |
| 15:42:40 | IPO | Thanks for comment ! | |
| 15:42:47 | elodilles | no problem | |
| 17:08:42 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: thanks for the review | |
| 17:09:04 | sean-k-mooney | ill fix the docs issues but propably tomorrow im getting a headache so i think ill call it a day | |
| #openstack-nova - 2023-04-20 | |||
| 07:43:43 | lajoskatona | bauzas: Hi, I opened a bug against Neutron/Nova/Tempest to track what we do with tests like the ones under tempest/api/compute/security_groups | |
| 07:44:01 | lajoskatona | bauzas: here's the bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2017023 | |
| 07:44:44 | lajoskatona | bauzas: I also noted kopecmartin to think about it from tempest perspective, and I plan to check what coverage we have in tempest/api/network or tempest/scenario | |
| 07:45:17 | lajoskatona | bauzas: so if you have some free time please check it. | |
| 07:45:31 | bauzas | lajoskatona: ack, I'll take a look | |
| 07:45:38 | lajoskatona | bauzas: thanks | |
| 07:46:33 | bauzas | lajoskatona: fwiw, I'd also like us to sit down in a room during the PTG to see all the failures we have in CI, and see how we can fix that | |
| 07:46:41 | bauzas | like a war room if you prefer | |
| 07:54:12 | lajoskatona | bauzas: I added a line to the Neutron etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/neutron-vancouver-2023#L41 | |
| 07:54:50 | bauzas | oh wow, you already have an etherpad :) | |
| 07:54:51 | lajoskatona | bauzas: I am still not sure if I will be personally there | |
| 07:54:57 | bauzas | I know | |
| 07:55:25 | bauzas | this is a difficult problem | |
| 07:55:36 | bauzas | we will mostly miss the quorum | |
| 07:58:34 | gibi | based on the current state of affairs nova will be far from quorum :/ | |
| 08:10:11 | bauzas | gibi: ship hasn't fully sailed yet, but anyway we'll miss a lot of contributors indeed | |
| 08:46:28 | opendevreview | xielijie proposed openstack/nova master: Correct retry interval during attach volume https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/880921 | |
| 11:08:22 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/yoga: Fix rescue volume-based instance https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/872118 | |
| 11:58:01 | sean-k-mooney | lajoskatona: im not sure we shoudl remove those tempest test while we still have supprot for them in nova | |
| 11:58:29 | sean-k-mooney | we deprecated there use years ago but since we have never risen our min microversion they are still fuly supported | |
| 11:59:26 | sean-k-mooney | we deprecated the apis in 2.36 as part of the newton release https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/reference/api-microversion-history.html#microversion | |
| 12:06:43 | lajoskatona | sean-k-mooney: ahh, ok, thanks, this is why I added Nova also the the bug to have all parties on the table | |
| 12:07:36 | lajoskatona | sean-k-mooney: so till the mi microversion is not bumped higher that 2.36 we have to keep these proxy APIs and the tests? | |
| 12:07:52 | sean-k-mooney | if i can leverage this as a forcing funciton to actully raise our min microversion then i would be happy to raise it above where those were decpreated and delete the code | |
| 12:08:24 | sean-k-mooney | lajoskatona: yes i think we do because they are still fully supproted and i think horizon might still be using some of them | |
| 12:10:00 | lajoskatona | sean-k-mooney: I see you also commented on the bug, thanks, it will help everybody to see the whole picture | |
| 12:10:24 | sean-k-mooney | i have no partically issue with skiping the nova test by defualt in most jobs | |
| 12:10:32 | sean-k-mooney | but the nova gate still need to test it | |
| 12:12:53 | sean-k-mooney | lajoskatona: we also have proxy apis for cinder and glance that we unfortunetlly still need to test | |
| 12:13:00 | sean-k-mooney | for basically the same reason | |
| 12:15:12 | sean-k-mooney | lajoskatona: im not that familar with horizon but https://github.com/openstack/horizon/commit/9067ae8b0fe6dd57906d0eb5fe31ee96eb021fd4 it looks like they have actully converted to usign neutron instead | |
| 12:15:59 | lajoskatona | sean-k-mooney: anyway I still think it is worth to discuss if we have to test these APIs for all patch, and instead run these tests against a really used API (Neutron in this this case but can be true for Glance or Cinder also) | |
| 12:20:29 | sean-k-mooney | well that is why i suggested not testign them in gates other then nova | |
| 12:20:55 | sean-k-mooney | so neutron cinder and glance coudl perhaps stop testign them but i think nova still needs too | |
| 12:21:21 | sean-k-mooney | i woudl suggest usign the Intergrated-Compute job to test them | |
| 12:21:44 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: gibi ^ does that sound reasonable to ye | |
| 12:22:24 | sean-k-mooney | i wont be at the physical ptg but once we have one job on nova testing the proxy apis then i think thats enough | |
| 12:32:33 | lajoskatona | sean-k-mooney: sonds reasonable, keep the tests and execute them in a Nova only job, and do not test these "legcy" API from other projects | |
| 12:33:10 | sean-k-mooney | that does mean if cidner or neutron breaks these ye wont see that breakage but we will | |
| 12:33:17 | sean-k-mooney | that said i dont think that has ever happened | |
| 12:33:24 | sean-k-mooney | so im not realy worreid about that | |
| 12:34:11 | sean-k-mooney | pluse we will see it and we can let ye know if it happens | |
| 12:41:21 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: can you summarize your opinion please ? | |
| 12:41:29 | bauzas | (just to make sure I understand it correctly) | |
| 12:42:00 | sean-k-mooney | tl;dr we cant stop testing proxy api unless we rais our min microversion but we dont need to test it in project other then nova | |
| 12:42:42 | sean-k-mooney | so im fine with not running the proxy api test in other proejct jobs and i think testing it only in the intergarte-compute jobs woudl be enough coverage for our gate | |
| 12:43:22 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. one job to smoke test that they still work as expected on our side but no expectation for other project to continue testing the proxy apis | |
| 12:43:29 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: sure, those are deprecated | |
| 12:43:39 | sean-k-mooney | yep but fully supported | |
| 12:44:08 | sean-k-mooney | deprecation in this case just means we wont extend them and you should not build new uasge of them | |
| 12:44:44 | sean-k-mooney | i would love to delete the code but to do that we really need to raise our min microversion | |
| 12:45:26 | sean-k-mooney | i think we should do that regardelss of this effort but i dont think we shoudl remove all testing in tempest if we report our min microvstion as 2.1 | |
| 12:46:18 | sean-k-mooney | anyway hopefully that is a sufficent summary if not ask away and i can clarify | |
| 12:50:45 | bauzas | cool | |
| 13:09:31 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: gibi im doing some jira cleanup this morning... so ill reping the weigher patch in the next hour or so | |
| 13:09:38 | sean-k-mooney | thanks for the reviews | |
| 13:14:37 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: cool. I can +2 it quickly as I'm OK with the content | |
| 17:15:34 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/zed: Handle InstanceInvalidState exception https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/872115 | |
| 18:34:08 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: add hypervisor version weigher https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/880231 | |
| 18:34:30 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: bauzas sorry that took me longer then it should have but its there for you in the morning | |
| #openstack-nova - 2023-04-21 | |||
| 07:49:24 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: +2 | |
| 08:41:43 | dvo-plv_ | sean-k-mooney: Hello | |
| 08:42:54 | dvo-plv_ | I would like to clarify our blueprint status. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/868377 | |
| 08:44:10 | dvo-plv_ | Maybe community need something from us to start further activities | |
| 09:48:52 | sean-k-mooney | no just pinging me and others to reveiw. my time is currently quite limited for upstream work so my review bandwith has been reduced alot due to downstream work. | |
| 09:49:08 | sean-k-mooney | i think i was more or less ok with it the last time i looked so ill take a look again | |
| 09:53:59 | sean-k-mooney | dvo-plv_: im happy with the spec as is. others might ask for more info but i think you have the main points. | |
| 09:54:15 | sean-k-mooney | i changed the topic in gerrit to bp/virtio-packedring-configuration-support | |
| 09:54:23 | sean-k-mooney | can you use the same topic for the code | |
| 10:19:35 | dvo-plv_ | okay, I will update topic for code. Currently it has https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:VirtIO_PackedRing | |
| 10:19:42 | dvo-plv_ | What does this topic means ? | |
| 10:29:09 | sean-k-mooney | we can use that on the spec | |
| 10:29:18 | sean-k-mooney | the topic is just wa way to group related patches together | |
| 10:29:27 | sean-k-mooney | so the code and spec should use the same one | |
| 10:30:07 | sean-k-mooney | by convention we use bp/<bluprint name> for features that are tracked by a bluepirnt or spec | |
| 10:30:17 | sean-k-mooney | and bug/<bug number> for bugs | |
| 10:30:39 | sean-k-mooney | otherwise its freeform | |
| 10:31:08 | sean-k-mooney | for feature that require changes in multiple project we try to use the same topic across all of them to be able to see all reated patches quickly | |
| 10:31:42 | sean-k-mooney | so now that you updated it https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:bp%252Fvirtio-packedring-configuration-support | |
| 10:32:00 | sean-k-mooney | we can see the spec, nova and os-traits patches all in one view | |
| 10:33:08 | sean-k-mooney | that tells me you are missing a patch to glance to update the metadefs https://github.com/openstack/glance/blob/master/etc/metadefs/compute-libvirt.json | |
| 10:33:48 | sean-k-mooney | dvo-plv_: ^ the metadefs are what horizon and heat use to generate the drop down for adding traits automatically | |
| 10:34:09 | sean-k-mooney | sorry not triats extra_specs and image properties | |
| 10:35:49 | dvo-plv_ | okay, I will investigate and fix | |
| 10:36:23 | sean-k-mooney | you basically jsut need to copy this https://github.com/openstack/glance/blob/master/etc/metadefs/compute-libvirt.json#L30-L35 | |
| 10:36:45 | sean-k-mooney | updatign mem_encyption to packed_ring | |