| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2023-11-21 | |||
| 16:24:07 | elodilles | :) | |
| 16:24:15 | elodilles | #info stable gates don't seem blocked | |
| 16:24:25 | elodilles | except now yoga with nova-emulation job :D | |
| 16:24:41 | elodilles | which is almost constantly failing as it looks... | |
| 16:24:44 | sean-k-mooney | do we want to nuke that | |
| 16:24:59 | bauzas | +1 | |
| 16:25:03 | elodilles | is it needed for yoga? | |
| 16:25:04 | sean-k-mooney | we woudl not be running it on unmaintaed anyway | |
| 16:25:18 | sean-k-mooney | and if its brokekn im not sure it worth fixing | |
| 16:25:19 | bauzas | unless we want to unmaintan yoga | |
| 16:25:27 | bauzas | *now* I think | |
| 16:25:30 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: it was ment to be in perodic-weekly | |
| 16:25:37 | sean-k-mooney | not in check | |
| 16:25:46 | sean-k-mooney | so while it shoudl work its not required | |
| 16:25:56 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: ACK, i'll check and try to remove from the check pipeline then | |
| 16:26:25 | bauzas | +1 | |
| 16:26:28 | elodilles | bauzas: we'll unmaintain yoga soon, but let's fix that for now if that is possible by eliminating that job o:) | |
| 16:27:25 | elodilles | it's also needed if we want a final release off yoga before it gets unmaintained | |
| 16:27:47 | elodilles | btw, stable releases: | |
| 16:27:51 | elodilles | #info stable release patches still open for review: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/releases+is:open+intopic:nova | |
| 16:28:17 | elodilles | do we still want to wait for patches? | |
| 16:28:30 | elodilles | a couple of stable bug fix have landed meanwhile | |
| 16:28:39 | bauzas | I think I clicked +2 on a yoga change | |
| 16:29:07 | sean-k-mooney | the one from tobias-urdin | |
| 16:29:08 | bauzas | elodilles: what's the deadline ? | |
| 16:29:10 | elodilles | (and that failed due to the nova-emulation) | |
| 16:29:12 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: yup | |
| 16:29:24 | sean-k-mooney | we should include that in the final release | |
| 16:29:51 | elodilles | bauzas: no strict deadline planned, as we (community) are already late, so just ASAP :) | |
| 16:30:49 | sean-k-mooney | we can quickly update the jobs after the meeting and then recheck the patch | |
| 16:30:54 | elodilles | i mean the EM transition deadline was Nov 2nd, but meanwhile the process is changing and now we need to move to Unmaintained instead | |
| 16:31:02 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: +1 | |
| 16:31:24 | bauzas | okay | |
| 16:31:34 | elodilles | then the general message then: | |
| 16:31:35 | bauzas | cool enough | |
| 16:31:37 | elodilles | #info stable branch status / gate failures tracking etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-branch-ci | |
| 16:31:56 | elodilles | add here stable gate issues if you encounter one ^^^ | |
| 16:32:09 | elodilles | and that's it i think | |
| 16:33:45 | bauzas | ++ | |
| 16:33:52 | bauzas | moving on then | |
| 16:34:06 | bauzas | #topic Open discussion | |
| 16:34:09 | bauzas | there was one item | |
| 16:34:13 | bauzas | in the agenda | |
| 16:34:22 | bauzas | (fwiesel) vmwareapi driver deprecation/removal: SAP wants to step up provide the resources to keep the driver maintained (CI, tests coverage, code changes, ...?). what would be needed? | |
| 16:34:27 | fwiesel | Hi, that would be me. | |
| 16:34:35 | bauzas | yes indeed | |
| 16:35:13 | fwiesel | So, essentially me and my colleagues talked to our management, and we have the commitment from them to dedicate 1FTE just for upstream work. | |
| 16:35:55 | fwiesel | My understanding is, the most pressing issue would be to have a working stable CI worker for the vmware api, followed by cleanup work, test-coverage, etc... | |
| 16:36:10 | fwiesel | Is that correct? | |
| 16:36:52 | bauzas | we basically deprecated the virt driver by Bobcat | |
| 16:37:04 | sean-k-mooney | and have someone work basically fultime on maintining it | |
| 16:37:04 | bauzas | and we explained the reasons in the relnotes | |
| 16:37:50 | bauzas | https://docs.openstack.org/releasenotes/nova/2023.2.html#deprecation-notes | |
| 16:37:59 | sean-k-mooney | fwiesel: for context this would be the tird time that someone has commited to maintianing that ci and working upstream to maintian the vmware dirver | |
| 16:38:00 | bauzas | "The vmwareapi driver is marked as experimental and may be removed in a future release. The driver is not tested by the OpenStack project and does not have a clear maintainer." | |
| 16:39:11 | fwiesel | Well, I hope that we can step up to be the clear maintainer. And I hope we are not held responsible for the actions of others. | |
| 16:39:14 | sean-k-mooney | we coudl delay the removal for a short period fo time to have you setup the ci but honestly i would prefer to proceed witht he removal and had hoped it woudl have merged already | |
| 16:39:33 | bauzas | the problem here is that most of the times, someone pops up when we are about to delete a virt driver, asks us to not remove it, tells us we will have a 3rd-party CI for a long time, but then after a few months, disappears while the CI job has problems | |
| 16:39:56 | bauzas | this is really a matter of trusting people and companies | |
| 16:40:56 | bauzas | in the maintime, some users think they can use that virt driver and find some problems | |
| 16:40:57 | gibi | fwiesel: what woudl be your timeline setting up a the CI? | |
| 16:41:10 | opendevreview | Elod Illes proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: Remove nova-emulation from check pipeline of Yoga https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/901604 | |
| 16:41:19 | bauzas | this is why we now say those kind of drivers are experimental | |
| 16:42:09 | grandchild | hi, also from SAP here, and we understand the lack of trust. not much we can say to that now, we'll have to show our work first. | |
| 16:42:36 | grandchild | the issue is exactly the time frame for us to set up a CI while you (understandably) go ahead with removal. | |
| 16:42:44 | fwiesel | Sure, trust must be earned, so we can't expect you do that right away. And I can't expect the driver not to be removed considering current timelines. But hopefully we can find a way forward to re-integrate it then later under some better circumstances. | |
| 16:43:06 | bauzas | fwiesel: grandchild: thanks for replying | |
| 16:43:11 | bauzas | so, I have a question | |
| 16:43:28 | bauzas | say you need some time for running a 3rd-party CI | |
| 16:43:36 | bauzas | and you need to reply to gibi on that | |
| 16:43:41 | bauzas | then, | |
| 16:44:06 | bauzas | how would you be able to provide solutions for the tests that would have problems ? | |
| 16:44:15 | bauzas | do you know about the vmwareapi driver? | |
| 16:44:41 | bauzas | running a job is possible, making it fiable is more difficult | |
| 16:44:44 | grandchild | if you ask about our familiarity with the vmware driver code, i'd say it's fairly hih | |
| 16:44:46 | fwiesel | gibi: It is hard for us yet to give a timeline on the CI as we are yet unclear about how much effort it will be for us. | |
| 16:44:56 | bauzas | s/fiable/reliable | |
| 16:45:03 | gibi | fwiesel: I see | |
| 16:45:51 | fwiesel | We maintain a fork here: https://github.com/sapcc/nova | |
| 16:46:30 | fwiesel | Mostly because we try to work around issues of scalability in vmware which are probably not of interest to the general community. | |
| 16:46:32 | bauzas | fwiesel: maybe if you could tell us how long you would need to find the needed efforts, this would be nice | |
| 16:46:47 | bauzas | have you already run tempest against your fork ? | |
| 16:47:38 | fwiesel | bauzas: Yes, we run tempest and unit tests. We have disable some tempest tests, I can check which ones. | |
| 16:48:35 | sean-k-mooney | fwiesel: what do run them with is it devstack? | |
| 16:48:49 | fwiesel | fwiesel: On the effort estimate, I can come back to you in a week. | |
| 16:48:51 | bauzas | fwiesel: that's good to hear, that's a first thing | |
| 16:48:52 | grandchild | we have a dedicated qa environment | |
| 16:49:06 | fwiesel | sean-k-mooney: We run it in qa environments on k8s | |
| 16:49:07 | sean-k-mooney | fwiesel: the tird party ci would have to deploy the gerrit chagne under review and report back with tempest test using the vmware driver | |
| 16:49:46 | sean-k-mooney | you would not need to use devstack you could use your k8s install tool provided it uses the nova commit form the review | |
| 16:49:46 | bauzas | fwiesel: do you already have ideas on how many runs you need to do for nova if you add a 3rd party CI ? | |
| 16:49:55 | bauzas | fwiesel: because this can be large | |
| 16:50:37 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: its much less then it used ot be but yes its non trivial | |
| 16:50:44 | bauzas | https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?project=openstack%2Fnova&branch=master&pipeline=check&skip=0 | |
| 16:50:45 | fwiesel | sean-k-mooney: The main concern is here more that we have to run arbitrary code, so we want it a bit more isolated. | |
| 16:51:16 | sean-k-mooney | fwiesel: yep form past expeince runing a third party ci for nova/neutron | |
| 16:51:24 | sean-k-mooney | geting it approval to run it is non trivial | |
| 16:51:30 | bauzas | fwiesel: grandchild: you can see in the above link how many builds we run | |
| 16:51:38 | bauzas | for the 'check' pipeline | |
| 16:52:33 | bauzas | and we can't unfortunately only test changes that modify the virt driver | |