Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2023-04-25
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
18:33:35 bauzas I can try to dig into those later
18:44:26 dansmith the fails look all volume detach related
18:44:31 dansmith so perhaps it's not really a ceph problem
18:44:38 dansmith but it seems like a large number for a single run, so I'm not sure
20:31:17 dansmith melwitt: can you +W this? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/881409/2
20:38:44 dansmith eharney: gouthamr: Well, it installs and "works" on jammy, but something isn't happy: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph/+/865315?tab=change-view-tab-header-zuul-results-summary
20:41:21 dansmith eharney: gouthamr I don't really know what I'm looking at, but I don't see any errors in the cinder or ceph stuff that I recognize, and just some "busy" messages from rbd around the failed detaches in the n-cpu log
20:42:25 gouthamr hey dansmith - /me is late to the party
20:43:06 dansmith gouthamr: we need to drop focal from the jobs and our gate has been blocked for two days because some did it early..we've reverted those things for the moment, but we need to get the ceph job working on jammy
20:43:37 dansmith gouthamr: the above patch unpins the jobs to let them run on jammy and they get pretty far, but some volume/ceph related failures are showing that something is not happy
20:44:31 dansmith gouthamr: are you the right person to get that working?
20:44:49 melwitt dansmith: just to confirm, you still want to remove after neutron has reverted? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/881430
20:45:27 dansmith melwitt: yeah the neutron failure was a couple failures ago, and not even the only problem.. but as noted in the original patch, it was intended to only live for antelope and then be reverted, so we need to do it anyway
20:45:27 gouthamr dansmith: probably not; i'm not an expert on rbd or cinder...
20:45:41 dansmith gouthamr: oh.. who is then?
20:46:10 gouthamr eharney is my go to guy, probably jbernard
20:46:48 dansmith gouthamr: okay he said earlier today that he was not likely the guy to ask (unless I misunderstood)
20:47:42 gouthamr ah :) let me look at the logs and see if something pops out
20:48:23 gouthamr we've been burnt before by using distro packages for ceph because fixes took forever to land - so we shied away from them and looked upstream..
20:49:08 gouthamr but, like you've discussed, the ceph community hasn't built jammy packages for the latest release (quincy) - they meant to, they lost people/mindshare in the recent months
20:49:20 dansmith gouthamr: yeah, but last I checked, there were not packages from ceph themselves for jammy
20:49:34 dansmith gouthamr: and the cephadm job is even more broken and marked n-v so I assume it's not healthier

Earlier   Later