Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2023-04-25
16:44:50 bauzas thanks folks
16:44:51 opendevreview Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Reproduce bug 1995153 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/862967
16:44:51 opendevreview Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Save cell socket correctly when updating host NUMA topology https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/862964
16:45:01 bauzas any other item to add before we end the meeting ?
16:45:22 auniyal small thing o/
16:45:27 auniyal CI on yoga: this one keep failing for different reasons, mostly
16:45:27 auniyal https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/839922
16:45:28 bauzas shot
16:45:42 auniyal mostly volume tests
16:46:23 sean-k-mooney ya that kind fo a pain im not sure there is anythin we can do beyond recheck
16:46:29 sean-k-mooney is it the volume detach tests
16:46:45 sean-k-mooney auniyal: gibi found some tests that are not waiting properly
16:46:47 bauzas I think this is also tracked on the stable CI failures etherpad
16:46:50 auniyal yes, attach and detach , but they are always different
16:47:04 auniyal sometime tomeout
16:47:15 sean-k-mooney yoga is not EM right so its still using tempest master?
16:47:20 auniyal no
16:47:46 auniyal tbc no, its not EM
16:47:50 sean-k-mooney ok
16:47:58 sean-k-mooney so it still can get tempest fixes if we fix those tests
16:48:09 bauzas yup
16:48:40 bauzas are we done ?
16:48:59 auniyal sorry I didn't get, any action on above
16:49:20 auniyal we need to fix tempest tests ?
16:49:47 sean-k-mooney i think just continue to reheck it. gibi found at least on test that is not waiting for sshable
16:49:53 bauzas no, we have some tempest patches up
16:49:57 sean-k-mooney and notice other dont appear to eb waiting but i dont have the context
16:50:01 bauzas and yoga would benefit from those
16:50:10 bauzas since tempest is branchless
16:50:14 sean-k-mooney oh do you have a link?
16:50:16 auniyal ack thanks
16:51:54 bauzas I was referring to gibi's recent discoveries of testing gap for ssh wait
16:52:13 bauzas (sorry was looking at the -tc meeting)
16:52:23 bauzas -tc chan*
16:52:35 bauzas can we close this meeting now ?
16:52:38 sean-k-mooney its fine we can wrap this here and chat after
16:53:06 bauzas cool
16:53:08 bauzas thanks all
16:53:12 bauzas #endmeeting
16:53:12 opendevmeet Meeting ended Tue Apr 25 16:53:12 2023 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
16:53:12 opendevmeet Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-04-25-16.00.html
16:53:12 opendevmeet Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-04-25-16.00.txt
16:53:12 opendevmeet Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-04-25-16.00.log.html
16:53:14 sean-k-mooney https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/880891
16:53:17 sean-k-mooney seams to be related
16:53:43 elodilles thanks o/
17:01:21 sean-k-mooney so that test is wrong
17:01:40 sean-k-mooney we do not supprot attaching or detaching prots or volume from neuton or cinder
17:02:28 frickler so we run this test for 6 years, have issues with it time and again, and only now notice that it tests an unsupported scenario? cool
17:03:33 sean-k-mooney frickler: it has never been supported
17:03:49 sean-k-mooney i jsut notice this existed because gmann has a dnm patch up
17:04:23 gmann which one ?
17:04:28 frickler yes, saw the comment in the patch. also didn't want to blame anyone, just enjoying the wondrous world of openstack once again
17:04:32 sean-k-mooney https://github.com/openstack/tempest/blob/master/tempest/api/volume/test_volumes_actions.py#L39-L55
17:04:34 frickler https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/881132/3
17:05:18 sean-k-mooney it kind of depend on what self.volumes_client.attach_volume actully does
17:05:22 frickler ah, no, the one below
17:05:22 sean-k-mooney if its calling nova its fine
17:05:37 sean-k-mooney if its using the cinder attachments api directly its not
17:07:16 sean-k-mooney that looks like its callining cinder https://github.com/openstack/tempest/blob/20e460dacfae6b4546903a9caaf9253330f27b5a/tempest/clients.py#L286
17:10:02 sean-k-mooney frickler: this was actully added 11 years ago https://github.com/openstack/tempest/commit/a42fe441703084449107fabb15fe42938c02ba08
17:10:15 sean-k-mooney that does not mean it has been correct or supported for all tha time
17:10:27 frickler ah, I was only looking at the current blame, which says 2017
17:10:45 frickler you can see the actual API calls in https://4ae644854fb3bf106e9b-6877b85dbe482cd2daa62a6731b06023.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/881132/3/check/tempest-full-py3/37d3ce7/controller/logs/tempest_log.txt
17:12:11 gmann frickler: sean-k-mooney ohk that one. those tests are meant to be cinder standalone case and they are not valid scenario involving nova in half way
17:12:32 sean-k-mooney right they are fine fi you are using cinder standalone
17:12:36 frickler POST https://213.32.75.38/compute/v2.1/servers/2a24008b-6c93-4b83-a678-8d5b0be7b6a1/os-volume_attachments
17:12:37 gmann nobody since starting tested if passing nova server id in attachment via cinder will work from nova perspective or not
17:12:58 frickler that looks like nova being used
17:13:07 gmann I was testing those to remove nova involvement from those tests and nova+cinder attachment anyways are tested in many other tests
17:13:32 sean-k-mooney yep nova should be revmoed form them
17:13:45 gmann frickler: attachment is directly to cinder not via nova so nova does not know about attachment but cinder think server is attched to volume so make it in-use
17:14:08 sean-k-mooney marking it in use is correct
17:14:22 sean-k-mooney but we shoudl not see the volume attaed to the vm
17:14:34 gmann yeah, i mean as nova does not know about attachment, adding server_id as valid attachment is not correct.
17:14:45 gmann hat server_id can be invalid or can be deleted anytime
17:14:50 gmann without cinder knopwing
17:15:05 gmann sean-k-mooney: yeah, VM does not know about volume
17:15:55 sean-k-mooney anyway im glad you are looking at it you can ping me after the patch is out of DNM if you want me to reivew
17:16:28 gmann k
17:17:06 sean-k-mooney dansmith: you pinged my yesterday to look at a patch maybe related to the stable uuid stuff
17:17:32 sean-k-mooney do you rememebr what it was
17:17:35 dansmith sean-k-mooney: the rt stuff, but it's all blocked of course.. gibi gave it the +W so it's probably good for me to just fast-approve once the gate is unblocked
17:17:49 sean-k-mooney oh right ya that was it
17:18:00 sean-k-mooney i remeber seeing it had a +w
17:18:02 sean-k-mooney cool
17:18:34 dansmith yep, thanks
17:18:47 dansmith I'll definitely hit you up if I need a re-review once things get unblocked
17:18:53 dansmith *if* they get unblocked I should say :)
17:19:17 frickler the pysaml revert mergen, so I think CI should be unblocked
17:19:21 frickler merged even
17:19:46 dansmith we'll see :)
17:20:28 sean-k-mooney im going to go get dinner. i might be around later but im mostly done for today
17:50:23 dansmith mmm, ceph job appears to be failing again in a similar way.. hope we don't have more work to do
18:31:21 bauzas dansmith: which patch are you checking for the job runs ?
18:31:46 bauzas so I can try to look over it tomorrow morning
18:32:05 dansmith https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph/+/865315
18:32:31 bauzas ack, will target it tomorrow morning
18:32:39 dansmith it only failed six tests this time instead of a timeout, so maybe it's better than I thought
18:32:49 dansmith but six is still a lot, and I haven't gone through the latest logs yet

Earlier   Later