| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2023-09-15 | |||
| 12:45:48 | bauzas | ralonsoh: yeah the one you said | |
| 12:45:53 | bauzas | but that's still failing | |
| 12:46:02 | bauzas | fresh fish from today's shelf | |
| 12:46:43 | ralonsoh | bauzas, https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/895167/1/tempest/api/compute/admin/test_live_migration.py isn't that enough? | |
| 12:46:51 | jras_ | I forgot to mention that the original flavor has had the quotas removed, before using domiftune to edit the domain config, they still seem to be set after live migration. | |
| 12:48:30 | bauzas | ralonsoh: unstable seems just be there for marking the test, but it still runs | |
| 12:48:32 | bauzas | https://opendev.org/openstack/tempest/commit/21f53012f76d11e3df327adcf87e67edf9045d09 | |
| 12:49:09 | ralonsoh | bauzas, but the job should not fail if the test fails | |
| 12:49:26 | bauzas | agreed, I'm now puzzled | |
| 12:49:32 | zigo | bauzas: Thanks, but I think what I wrote isn't enough. What's happening to me, is: | |
| 12:49:32 | zigo | setuptools.errors.PackageDiscoveryError: Multiple top-level packages discovered in a flat-layout: ['debian', 'pymemcache']. | |
| 12:49:32 | zigo | (ie: the Debian folder is annoying setuptools 66.1.1, though it seems 66.1.2 is kind of fixed...) | |
| 12:49:45 | ralonsoh | bauzas, if in this new recheck it fails again, I'll send a patch to skip it | |
| 12:50:28 | bauzas | zigo: there are good reasons why I never did put my toe into the packaging mess, and that one you mention looks another good one to me :) | |
| 12:51:19 | bauzas | ralonsoh: ack | |
| 12:51:32 | zigo | Python is a mess, not packaging ! :) | |
| 12:52:08 | bauzas | zigo: sure, having 3 different official ways to package + a lot of third-party ones is certainly not a mess | |
| 12:52:31 | zigo | Well, everyone's wrong, I'm the only one doing things right ... :P | |
| 12:54:17 | bauzas | #xkcd927, I agree | |
| 12:56:18 | zigo | Oh, I was wrong, pymemcache isn't using PBR, but standard setuptools with complex PBR like setup.cfg... | |
| 12:56:31 | zigo | So that's indeed a very good case for #xkcd927 ... | |
| 12:57:24 | zigo | But the issue really is Python packaging, and not Deb packaging. | |
| 12:57:31 | zigo | (not jocking, this time...) | |
| 13:02:07 | zigo | So, setup.cfg's way is (3rd way that I know now...): | |
| 13:02:08 | zigo | [options] | |
| 13:02:08 | zigo | packages = foo | |
| 13:12:02 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/placement master: Update 2023.2 reqs to support os-traits 3.0.0 as min version https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/895186 | |
| 13:17:26 | elodilles | zigo: somewhat similar case was this: https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:setuptools-issue-3197 | |
| 13:17:32 | elodilles | i think... | |
| 13:37:12 | zigo | Thinking about it: it's not even 3 standards that we have, but 4: | |
| 13:37:12 | zigo | - setup.py (the lebacy way) | |
| 13:37:12 | zigo | - setup.cfg by setup tools | |
| 13:37:12 | zigo | - setup.cfg by PBR | |
| 13:37:12 | zigo | - pyproject.toml | |
| 13:37:14 | zigo | Fun ... :P | |
| 13:42:18 | bauzas | elodilles: want me to rebase the placement RC1 patch with the new SHA1 ? | |
| 14:02:46 | elodilles | bauzas: if you could do that that would be awesome o:) | |
| 14:18:43 | bauzas | elodilles: shall work https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/894698 | |
| 14:19:33 | bauzas | (I needed to checkout HEAD^ for the bobcat file before using new-release tool) | |
| 15:02:05 | Uggla | bauzas, I think, I have spotted the difference and the "issue" with service token + sdk usage. | |
| 15:40:16 | bauzas | Uggla: happy to hear | |
| 15:41:05 | Uggla | I'm currently writing a wrapup of my findings, I will share it Monday. | |
| 15:41:28 | Uggla | coz I need to go to a school meeting... | |
| 15:42:15 | bauzas | Uggla: haha, me too on both Monday (for Charline) and Tuesday (Clémence) :) | |
| 15:42:15 | bauzas | Uggla: haha, me too on both Monday (for Charline) and Tuesday (Clémence) :) | |
| 15:59:35 | elodilles | bauzas: thanks, placement rc1 patch is on the gate! | |
| 15:59:53 | elodilles | now we need only the nova rc1 :] | |
| 16:13:54 | dansmith | we still need to land the revert series | |
| 16:13:58 | dansmith | I just rechecked the top one | |
| 16:14:19 | dansmith | and looks like the bottom one just hit a gate reset :/ | |
| 16:15:23 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement stable/2023.2: Update .gitreview for stable/2023.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/895491 | |
| 16:15:25 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement stable/2023.2: Update TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE for stable/2023.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/895492 | |
| 16:15:26 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement master: Update master for stable/2023.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/895493 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2023-09-16 | |||
| 21:27:15 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Make our nova-ovs-hybrid-plug job omit cinder https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/893540 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2023-09-18 | |||
| 07:22:18 | bauzas | good morning Nova | |
| 10:59:15 | opendevreview | Konrad Gube proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Re-propose using extend volume completion action for 2024.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/895648 | |
| 11:36:35 | sean-k-mooney | fyi https://github.com/mtreinish/stestr/issues/350 is going to make the gate explode | |
| 12:02:34 | opendevreview | Pavlo Shchelokovskyy proposed openstack/nova master: Do not store InstanceInvalidState as instance_fault https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860702 | |
| 12:09:09 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: at least if the gate was actually working... | |
| 12:10:10 | sean-k-mooney | im pushing a uc fix for this now | |
| 12:15:21 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: you know that we fail hard on https://launchpad.net/bugs/1940425 right? | |
| 12:16:13 | sean-k-mooney | ish | |
| 12:16:26 | sean-k-mooney | they reverted a particl fix on the neutron side for ovn | |
| 12:16:31 | sean-k-mooney | and have another fix | |
| 12:16:38 | sean-k-mooney | btu i dont think that is merged | |
| 12:16:42 | sean-k-mooney | it passes with ml2/ovs | |
| 12:16:46 | sean-k-mooney | so this is not a nova issue | |
| 12:17:03 | sean-k-mooney | its a neutorn one its also not an os-vif issues as far as i am aware | |
| 12:17:11 | sean-k-mooney | i have not looked that this in a while however | |
| 12:17:52 | sean-k-mooney | so i still stand by the invaldifor nova and incomplte/invalid for os-vif tatus | |
| 12:18:09 | sean-k-mooney | this is a neutron bug only when using ml2/ovn | |
| 12:18:50 | sean-k-mooney | we can skip that test if we want by default and leave it on in the hybrid plug job which uses ml2/ovs | |
| 12:19:02 | sean-k-mooney | until they fix it | |
| 12:20:55 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: fyi i explained why this is a neutron bug in https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1940425/comments/23 | |
| 12:21:29 | bauzas | yup, we know this is a neutron test and ralonsoh works on it AFAIK | |
| 12:21:55 | bauzas | context : https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/894945 is getting trampled a lot due to this | |
| 12:22:42 | sean-k-mooney | ya so in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/893540 | |
| 12:23:02 | sean-k-mooney | i mentioned to dan that we could skip it in the other jobs where its failing and nova-ovs-hybrid-plug | |
| 12:23:06 | sean-k-mooney | would still give us coverage | |
| 12:23:11 | sean-k-mooney | want me to do that now? | |
| 12:23:38 | sean-k-mooney | we should unskip it in nova when they fix the bug but there is no reason to keep testing somethign that is broken in the interim | |
| 12:33:49 | bauzas | let's wait for dan to be here, but meh | |
| 12:34:00 | bauzas | both the changes I want to merge are in the gate by nox | |
| 12:39:16 | sean-k-mooney | ill put up a patch and ye can review | |
| 12:46:06 | bauzas | ++ | |
| 12:50:03 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: disable ovn based testing of test_live_migration_with_trunk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/895655 | |
| 12:50:18 | sean-k-mooney | i think ^ is correct but lets see what the ci says | |
| 12:53:23 | bauzas | ack | |
| 13:41:24 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova-specs master: nova-specs shoudl use upper-constraints https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/895683 | |
| 13:41:32 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Revert "Add nova-manage ironic-compute-node-move" https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/894945 | |
| 13:46:25 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: ok so nova-specs was not using UC so it got broken by the new release. since then there has also been a new release of stestr that corects the probelm | |
| 13:46:52 | sean-k-mooney | so i abandoned the uc clamp patch and made nova-spec actully use upper-constraits | |
| 13:47:31 | sean-k-mooney | it will also resolve itself once stestr 4.1.0 makes it way into the pip caches of the relvent ci providers so we should be unblokced there | |
| 13:47:33 | bauzas | huzzah, one last merge todo :) | |
| 13:51:25 | dansmith | bauzas: yeah we need to get that last one landed | |
| 13:56:31 | bauzas | yup | |
| 13:56:40 | bauzas | I'll also click on the nova-specs | |
| 14:37:49 | sahid | o/ | |
| 14:38:22 | sahid | qucik question regarding event vif-plug | |
| 14:38:29 | sahid | how nova neutron are communicating? | |