| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2023-07-07 | |||
| 11:25:45 | bauzas | elodilles: ok so I'll modify https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/885365 to EOL all our repos | |
| 11:25:58 | elodilles | bauzas: ACK | |
| 11:26:25 | elodilles | and thanks in advance | |
| 11:51:22 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: i think as long as the jobs are still on the branch we wont get a warnign form zuul but i could be wrong | |
| 11:51:44 | sean-k-mooney | i think we will only get that after its merged unless you try to do a depend on patch | |
| 11:52:05 | sean-k-mooney | if you co t oa repo that is using a delete job and depend on that patch then it should give you an error | |
| 11:52:35 | sean-k-mooney | something along the lines of "unable to sablaise job graph" or similar | |
| 12:28:14 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: yepp, apparently it works like that :S | |
| 12:29:03 | elodilles | at least this works: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-zuul-jobs/+/887950 | |
| 12:29:16 | elodilles | (the other way around) | |
| 12:30:36 | elodilles | bauzas: I've found only these 2 jobs that can be deleted after nova's stable/train goes to EOL ^^^ | |
| 12:36:02 | sean-k-mooney | hopefully the dvsm job is one fo them... | |
| 12:36:27 | sean-k-mooney | it would be nice to finally get rid of all the zuul legacy jobs | |
| 12:38:23 | elodilles | yes. though there are other repos that uses some. and of course until old stable branches are not deleted these are likely 'used' | |
| 12:40:06 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: fun https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2025813 apprenatly that affect nova-ceph-multistore too | |
| 12:41:22 | sean-k-mooney | validations are not disabled in nova | |
| 12:41:31 | sean-k-mooney | so it must be disabeld in evstack-plugin-ceph-tempest-py3 or one of the parents | |
| 12:42:22 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph/commit/bf4598d923bebe9ba31e6651a07596017208b37e need to be backported | |
| 12:43:02 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: somehow i thought that the backport if this would solve the issue: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/887660 | |
| 12:44:52 | elodilles | or i guess both have to be backported to make the job passing :S | |
| 12:45:59 | sean-k-mooney | well validatiosn are disabled in the ceph multisotre job | |
| 12:46:03 | sean-k-mooney | and reimage requires it | |
| 12:46:32 | sean-k-mooney | so i just cherrypicked dansmith's patch vai the ui https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph/+/887879 | |
| 12:48:10 | elodilles | cool, thanks! let's see if that helps :) this looks promising | |
| 12:48:19 | ozzzo_work | I have a hypervisor that was "temporarily" removed from the cluster by migrating off the VMs and then shutting it down. Now it's not coming back, so I need to remove it, but I'm getting "Unable to delete compute service that has in-progress migrations." | |
| 12:48:29 | ozzzo_work | How can I work around this error and delete the compute service? | |
| 12:48:39 | ozzzo_work | https://paste.openstack.org/show/bbVmkA9rYREg5f52fe8z/ | |
| 12:49:06 | sean-k-mooney | ozzzo_work: you likely miseed doing resize_confirm on the migrated instances | |
| 12:49:37 | sean-k-mooney | there is one in confirming | |
| 12:49:48 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: should we add a Depends-On to https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887674 ? | |
| 12:49:58 | ozzzo_work | probably, but the "Server UUID" is blank. How can I make it finish? | |
| 12:50:21 | sean-k-mooney | oh am yes only because we need both jobs to pass but otherwise there isnt a dep | |
| 12:50:23 | sean-k-mooney | ill do that now | |
| 12:50:47 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.1: enable validations in nova-lvm https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887674 | |
| 12:52:02 | sean-k-mooney | ya its balcnk on all fo those which is odd. | |
| 12:52:12 | sean-k-mooney | am you could just update the row to completed | |
| 12:52:48 | sean-k-mooney | you cant for this via the api you will have to look in the db | |
| 12:53:01 | sean-k-mooney | and update it directly | |
| 12:53:40 | sean-k-mooney | if its set to compelte or error i think it will allow the ocmpute service to be deleted | |
| 12:54:25 | ozzzo_work | ok. I was hoping to avoid spelunking in the DB but fortunately this is a dev cluster | |
| 12:55:07 | sean-k-mooney | well the other approch is to understadn why the compute service is not coming up | |
| 12:55:09 | sean-k-mooney | and fix that | |
| 12:55:14 | sean-k-mooney | and avoid redpeloying it | |
| 12:55:25 | bauzas | elodilles: you probably have seen it but I updated https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/885365 | |
| 12:57:58 | elodilles | bauzas: ACK, thanks! \o/ | |
| 13:31:18 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.1: enable validations in nova-lvm https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887674 | |
| 15:13:47 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Add support for Napatech LinkVirt SmartNICs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/859290 | |
| 16:20:49 | gouthamr | o/ sean-k-mooney Uggla_ bauzas : we've one last manila api spec relating to virtiods to close out on, you'd looked at it in the past, could you please look again? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/manila-specs/+/881934 | |
| 16:24:51 | sean-k-mooney | i tried to look at this yesteredsay but i was too tired. to dig into it. there are still refecne to thte nova service user that make me uncomfortable | |
| 16:43:24 | sean-k-mooney | i think Uggla_ and bauzas are best placed to review form the context of the nova mainal share feature | |
| 16:43:58 | sean-k-mooney | gouthamr: if ye have a spec freeze i would proceed with it and we can try and loop back to it | |
| 16:44:03 | sean-k-mooney | when its used | |
| 17:00:58 | gouthamr | sean-k-mooney++ ty; ack, we can surely work some details over the code reviews | |
| 17:02:07 | sean-k-mooney | what im expecting is when an access rules visablity restriciotn is create by nova | |
| 17:03:55 | sean-k-mooney | the rule use shoudl be defied using the proejct id and user id form the users token not nova's servife token | |
| 17:04:52 | sean-k-mooney | but we would record that the visabity restriction was create by a service not a user | |
| 17:09:22 | sean-k-mooney | nova may be talkign to manilla with an applciation credital or its user account could change over time so we shoudl not be recording hte userid or proejct id form the service token in manilla | |
| 17:18:01 | gouthamr | yeah we’d not be storing any information regarding nova in the Manila db | |
| 17:18:55 | gouthamr | nova user I mean :) | |
| 17:19:48 | gouthamr | the service user is validated, and we store a string to remember that a service user was used to create a lock… the api would only allow service users to remove the lock | |
| 18:07:44 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.1: testing: Fix and robustify archive_deleted_rows test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887978 | |
| 18:07:45 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.1: database: Archive parent and child rows "trees" one at a time https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887979 | |
| 18:08:58 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/zed: testing: Fix and robustify archive_deleted_rows test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887980 | |
| 18:08:59 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/zed: database: Archive parent and child rows "trees" one at a time https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887981 | |
| 18:16:52 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: testing: Fix and robustify archive_deleted_rows test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887982 | |
| 18:16:53 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: database: Archive parent and child rows "trees" one at a time https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887983 | |
| 18:34:52 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: testing: Fix and robustify archive_deleted_rows test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887984 | |
| 18:34:53 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: database: Archive parent and child rows "trees" one at a time https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887985 | |
| 18:42:02 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: testing: Fix and robustify archive_deleted_rows test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887987 | |
| 18:42:03 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: database: Archive parent and child rows "trees" one at a time https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887988 | |
| 20:49:04 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: database: Archive parent and child rows "trees" one at a time https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887988 | |
| 21:16:55 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/victoria: testing: Fix and robustify archive_deleted_rows test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887997 | |
| 21:16:56 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/victoria: database: Archive parent and child rows "trees" one at a time https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887998 | |
| 21:50:36 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/ussuri: testing: Fix and robustify archive_deleted_rows test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/888001 | |
| 21:50:37 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/ussuri: database: Archive parent and child rows "trees" one at a time https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/888002 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2023-07-10 | |||
| 09:49:27 | opendevreview | Nobuhiro MIKI proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add 'COMPUTE_ADDRESS_SPACE_*' traits support https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/873221 | |
| 13:07:17 | opendevreview | Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova master: Bump MIN_{LIBVIRT,QEMU} for "Bobcat" https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/887255 | |
| 13:11:06 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: --^ Hope that looks better; I'd also like a closer look at the MIN_LIBVIRT_AARCH64_CPU_COMPARE const removal code (Cc: gibi) | |
| 14:42:13 | dansmith | bauzas: I'd really like to get some review on this while I have time to address any concerns and so there's some soak time before release: https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:bp/compute-object-ids+status:open | |
| 14:42:25 | dansmith | if I should just stop asking for this release let me know :) | |
| 14:51:11 | bauzas | dansmith: no no, sorry, last week I was focusing on spec | |
| 14:51:20 | bauzas | this week, I'll start to look on the series :) | |
| 14:52:15 | dansmith | thanks | |
| 15:30:38 | auniyal71 | hey dansmith, can you please have another look on this - Refactoring CinderFixture - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885756/6 | |
| 15:31:11 | dansmith | auniyal71: yep, I will.. I haven't yet processed my review email from being on PTO :) | |
| 15:31:30 | auniyal71 | ack, yes, was waiting for you :) thanks | |
| 16:24:03 | opendevreview | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Refactor CinderFixture https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885756 | |
| 16:24:11 | dansmith | auniyal71: fixed ^ | |
| 16:49:01 | auniyal71 | ack, thanks, how did you knew it failed at _test_attach_volume_error | |
| 16:50:57 | auniyal71 | dansmith, did it show in error | |
| 16:51:03 | auniyal71 | with tox | |
| 16:51:45 | dansmith | auniyal71: you saw what I saw, which is what was shown in CI | |
| 16:52:01 | auniyal71 | yes | |
| 16:52:22 | dansmith | the problem was not *your* autospec=False thing, it was that case of the test was attempting to re-mock something you already had mocked and *that* was the failing autospec | |
| 16:52:45 | dansmith | i.e. the mock decorator on that test sub-case that I removed | |
| 16:54:08 | auniyal71 | okay, | |
| 16:56:03 | auniyal71 | yes, I understood , it was re-mocking and thats problem but couldn't find at what place. | |
| 16:56:43 | dansmith | to find that, I added a try..except around the action() call, and then if failed, printed which one of those in the list was causing the problem | |
| 16:56:55 | dansmith | then going to that, it was clear to find that decorator mock | |
| 16:57:36 | auniyal71 | oh okay, got it, thanks dansmith | |