Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2023-11-14
16:48:03 bauzas we can still approve the bp
16:48:09 sean-k-mooney yep
16:48:14 bauzas like we did with nova-net
16:48:21 sean-k-mooney just wanted to clarify that since we expanded the scope at the ptg
16:48:23 bauzas anyone having concerns again ?
16:48:33 bauzas okay so
16:48:50 bauzas #agreed https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/remove-vmware-support to be accepted as a specless BP
16:48:54 bauzas there we go
16:49:11 bauzas sean-k-mooney: I'll just set the LP fields right after the meeting
16:49:15 sean-k-mooney thanks
16:49:18 sean-k-mooney thats all from me
16:49:23 bauzas and we can start to review your patches tomorrow
16:49:26 bauzas cool
16:49:35 bauzas so, let me call it a wrap
16:49:42 bauzas thanks all
16:49:45 bauzas #endmeeting
16:49:45 opendevmeet Meeting ended Tue Nov 14 16:49:45 2023 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
16:49:45 opendevmeet Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-11-14-16.00.html
16:49:45 opendevmeet Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-11-14-16.00.txt
16:49:45 opendevmeet Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-11-14-16.00.log.html
16:50:56 dvo-plv sean-k-mooney, How we can attend tomorrow review. Does it meeting or what ?
16:51:21 sean-k-mooney no its just that tommrrow we are goign to make time to reveiw via gerrit
16:51:27 sean-k-mooney we will be disucssing things here
16:51:32 sean-k-mooney on irc too as needed
16:52:00 bauzas sean-k-mooney: paperwork stamps dully noted.
16:52:15 dvo-plv I see ,okay. Feel free to ping me, thank you
16:52:22 bauzas (on both BPs)
16:52:30 elodilles bauzas: minor clarification: pyhton-novaclient and osc-placement had no relevant changes i think, that's why we only have os-vif Caracal-1 proposed. nova and placement are services, so they don't need Caracal-1 release, hence release patches are not generated for them. (though we could release .0b1 releases, but that is unnecessary as we discussed)
16:52:47 bauzas ack
17:03:25 gmann bauzas: yeah, abandon the hyperV removal spec. i proposed it before our PTG discussion.
17:39:17 bauzas dansmith: can't find the procedural blueprint for https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/libvirt-dev-alias
17:39:24 bauzas fancy creating it ?
17:39:53 bauzas https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/2024.1/approved/libvirt-dev-alias.html links to it
17:40:31 dansmith oh I probably never created it yeah
17:41:13 dansmith bauzas: done
17:41:40 bauzas cool
17:43:34 bauzas okay, https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/2024.1 reflects what we have
17:43:54 bauzas (except john's BP which isn't approved yet)
17:44:21 bauzas folks, etherpad just created https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-caracal-status
17:44:33 bauzas I'll curate the list of blueprints to find the relevant gerrit series
17:44:45 bauzas but you should be able to look at it tomorrow
17:46:27 sean-k-mooney cool thanks bauzas
18:01:21 opendevreview Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: libvirt: Cap with max_instances GPU types https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/899625
18:01:41 bauzas dansmith: sean-k-mooney: squashed my SRIOV patches into a single one
18:02:04 bauzas like dansmith said to me ;)
18:02:35 bauzas operators would then provide the max instances and then restarting nova-compute so the virt driver would delete the ResourceProviders
18:03:54 sean-k-mooney bauzas: i looked at those previosuly but i dont think i found where dansmith said that
18:04:02 sean-k-mooney so i was waiting for an update before looking again
18:09:10 bauzas sean-k-mooney: we discussed this in a gmeet
18:09:18 bauzas hence why no comments
18:18:35 opendevreview Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Detach disks using alias when possible https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/893068
18:18:35 opendevreview Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: Debug some volumes not setting alias https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/900935
18:24:49 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: Make sqlalchemy-2x job voting again https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/900538
20:52:38 opendevreview Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: Debug some volumes not setting alias https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/900935
22:34:06 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add encryption support to convert_image https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/870934
#openstack-nova - 2023-11-15
08:26:25 bauzas happy implementation review day everyone
08:26:39 bauzas as a reminder, please look at https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-caracal-status
08:26:39 gibi o/
08:28:06 bauzas gibi: ah was just adding your line :p
08:28:19 gibi :)
08:40:51 dvo-plv 0/
09:46:44 gboutry1 Hi nova, I'm trying to setup live migration and the migration is failing at the step compareHypervisorCPU with CPU doesn't have compatibility.
09:46:47 gboutry1 I'm running an openstack cloud on two identical VMs, each running an hypervisor. here's the capabilities: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/cvvngtk4PG/
09:46:50 gboutry1 I've tried virsh cpu-compare cpu.xml, which returns CPU described in cpu.xml is identical to host CPU
09:46:53 gboutry1 When using virsh hypervisor-cpu-compare cpu.xml, I get: CPU described in cpu.xml is incompatible with the CPU provided by hypervisor on the host
09:46:56 gboutry1 Is there anyway to get what's the reason hypervisor-cpu-compare is failing ?
10:22:28 gboutry1 Adding the --error flag, I get the following error: error: the CPU is incompatible with host CPU: Host CPU does not provide required features: ht, osxsave, ospke, waitpkg
10:23:08 gboutry1 But I can clearly see them in virsh capabilities
12:32:21 gibi gboutry1: you might hit by https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2039803
12:38:13 gboutry1 thanks gibi, it looks close enough, do you know what's the workaround sean-k-mooney is talking about ? Maybe setting the cpu_mode to custom with a cpu model instead of configuring with host-model ?
12:44:18 sean-k-mooney loading context
12:45:10 sean-k-mooney but i belvie there are two workarounds
12:45:12 sean-k-mooney https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html#workarounds.skip_cpu_compare_on_dest
12:45:35 sean-k-mooney or ya using a custom model might also work
13:00:27 gibi bauzas: how do you feel about https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/831193/34#message-95b03db3501a7b105700779fb484b5cf740087ea is this style difference worth a respin?
13:00:40 gibi (it is not formatting style difference)
13:14:36 sean-k-mooney it proably should use the ovo approch
13:15:28 sean-k-mooney this is not really an area i look at much in the code base so im generally less opinonated about hwo this is done
13:25:54 gibi yeah I don't know all the possible consequences of our common style so I cannot fully judge what this departure means. At a first glance what Uggla_ wrote works
13:26:32 sean-k-mooney i think it might be more error prone if we are adding filed perhaps but maybe not
13:27:27 sean-k-mooney in general a new object filed results in a new db field too so there is some benifit to delegating to the object implemention
13:27:40 sean-k-mooney presumably if we only set the filed that changed
13:27:51 sean-k-mooney there is a minutly smaller db update
13:29:35 gibi bottom line I won't block on this just wanted to highlight as others might have a reason to block on this :)
13:31:15 sean-k-mooney melaine or dan may have input. jay certenly would have had an opion on it but i cant guess what that would have been
13:33:27 gibi :)
13:33:32 gibi I miss Jay
13:34:16 sean-k-mooney so do i, but he has moved on to better things. he is still aroudn the k8s ecosystem i belive
13:34:31 sean-k-mooney as in he sometimes attends kubecon
13:48:30 gibi yeah when I started the k8s operator work I found his work in github doing k8s operators for aws services
14:54:49 bauzas gibi: sean-k-mooney: sorry guys was disconnecting a bit after a huge load
14:55:11 bauzas gibi: context, about calling the DB directly from the object ?
14:55:57 gibi bauzas: it is the way the db update is implemented by passing individual fields instead of passing an updates dict
14:56:43 gibi we tend to use obj_get_changes and get the dict and pass it to SQLA update() call
14:56:52 gibi s/and/to/
14:57:56 bauzas I don't disagree with you, see the other comment from PS17
14:58:11 bauzas https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/831193/comment/6cfa2a63_4b585a14/
14:58:32 bauzas tl;dr: yeah we no longer need to create a specific interface for API DB
14:59:45 bauzas that said, given the number of changes we have, maybe we should just ask for a new follow-up change
15:02:15 dvo-plv hello, All

Earlier   Later