Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2023-11-28
16:32:44 bauzas elodilles: ping me again tomorrow
16:33:11 elodilles bauzas: ack, thanks in advance!
16:36:09 bauzas ok, next is a new topic
16:36:11 bauzas #topic vmwareapi 3rd-party CI efforts Highlights
16:36:31 fwiesel Shall I?
16:36:49 bauzas fwiesel: shoot :)
16:36:53 fwiesel #Info Gerrit Event Stream connected to our CI (Argo) with personal user
16:37:27 fwiesel So, nothing spectacular. Events go in, they could trigger whatever we want to run later. That part is the more tricky one, and peope are working on it.
16:38:07 fwiesel The most complicated part is the networking, we try to cut it down as much as possible so we test only nova.
16:38:48 fwiesel #Info CI user needs a name. According to naming convention: SAP vmwareapi CI. Has risk of confusion, as SAP is not a vendor of the technology. Our preference simply "SAP CI" or "SAP tempest CI".
16:39:34 fwiesel So, the naming convention on the 3rd party CI suggests "Company Technology CI"
16:39:37 bauzas fwiesel: I'd prefer 'vmwareapi CI run by SAP'
16:40:02 bauzas something telling users what exactly has been run
16:40:24 gibi +1 on keep mentioning vmwareapi in the name
16:40:26 fwiesel That would work. But if we run another CI, say for cinder, then we end up with the same thing as the VMware nsxt CI running cinder
16:40:27 bauzas or yeah, "SAP vmwareapi CI"
16:41:01 bauzas honestly, I don't wanna bikeshed
16:41:17 bauzas I understand that you'd appreciate the SAP name in the CI job name
16:41:27 fwiesel Okay then we go with your proposal "vmwareapi CI run by SAP"
16:41:34 bauzas but I also want my users to know that it's testing with vmwareapi virt driver
16:41:47 bauzas so, please keep both names
16:41:54 fwiesel Fine by me.
16:41:57 bauzas I'm French and I'm bad at namings :)
16:42:17 bauzas but my gut is saying "any words with both SAP and vmwareapi are fine by me"
16:42:51 fwiesel Then we agree on "vmwareapi CI run by SAP"?
16:43:58 fwiesel #agreed The CI user will be named "vmwareapi CI run by SAP"
16:44:11 fwiesel That's from my side. Any questions?
16:45:21 fwiesel Well, then I think we are through.
16:46:23 bauzas ++
16:46:38 bauzas thanks fwiesel for the report
16:46:40 bauzas :)
16:46:53 bauzas greatly appreciated
16:46:59 fwiesel You're welcome
16:47:00 bauzas last topic then
16:47:03 bauzas #topic Open discussion
16:47:12 bauzas the agenda is empty
16:47:19 bauzas anything anyone ?
16:48:10 sean-k-mooney nope
16:48:12 bauzas cool
16:48:20 bauzas thanks all, giving you back 12 mins
16:48:22 bauzas #endmeeting
16:48:22 opendevmeet Meeting ended Tue Nov 28 16:48:22 2023 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
16:48:22 opendevmeet Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-11-28-16.00.html
16:48:22 opendevmeet Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-11-28-16.00.txt
16:48:22 opendevmeet Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-11-28-16.00.log.html
16:49:57 elodilles thanks bauzas o-
16:50:00 elodilles o/
16:50:15 fwiesel thanks a lot \o
19:41:08 melwitt dansmith: I have noticed (anecdotally) that a large portion of gate failures have been due to guest kernel panics. I have spent some time looking at them and see for example "pci 0000:00:03.6: BAR 13: failed to assign [io size 0x1000]" and "pci 0000:00:03.6: BAR 13: no space for [io size 0x1000]" I'm not sure how to tell which thing caused the panic. and in my search for more info online I haven't found anything other than mention of
19:41:08 melwitt old kernel bugs or people saying to run fsck and try again. not sure how to approach this, so if you have any thoughts, it would probably help
19:42:16 melwitt it seems weird to me how frequent this is. don't know what that could mean either. in the past guest kernel panics were a lot more rare
19:46:58 dansmith orly, well, that might explain the uptick lately... but yeah, I'd lean on kashyap and sean-k-mooney to look at those sorts of things
19:47:28 dansmith unfortunately, we've had trouble getting our kernel team to look at those things because we don't really run a supported kernel, but with the recent cirros update, we're closer to a support-able kernel I think
19:47:31 dansmith so might be worth trying again
19:49:03 melwitt ok, yeah. I checked and we are running the newest kernel that cirros supports. I did wonder if there could be a chance for improvement by using something other than cirros, like to get a different/newer kernel version
19:50:05 melwitt or I guess maybe building our own cirros with a newer kernel
20:07:37 dansmith I mean, it's possible but cirros is also tailored to work in very small environments, which is important for us
20:07:56 dansmith a stock distro kernel (and certainly image) won't likely work well in our super tiny guests
20:08:06 dansmith and if we had to increase the size of those, we'd need to make other changes
20:08:19 dansmith getting some kernel person to tell us what the crashes mean would be a good first start
20:08:40 dansmith like if it's "that should never happen" or "they're already memory constrained and hitting a bug as a result" or whatever
20:30:00 melwitt yeah
21:58:15 opendevreview Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Fix typos https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/901457
23:44:42 sean-k-mooney[m] melwitt: cirrus uses the ubuntu lts kernel just in case you didnt know that
23:45:48 sean-k-mooney[m] i really should try and make time to get my alpine serise working again but honestly havnt had time or energy to do that.
23:46:36 melwitt sean-k-mooney[m]: I saw on their site 🙂 but I also see the cirros we're using is also using the nearly newest kernel for jammy already so I guess maybe there's little chance a newer version would make a difference
23:46:36 melwitt sean-k-mooney[m]: I saw on their site 🙂 but I also see the cirros we're using is also using the nearly newest kernel for jammy already so I guess maybe there's little chance a newer version would make a difference
23:47:04 sean-k-mooney[m] yep 6.x is using the 22.04/jammy kernel
23:47:52 sean-k-mooney[m] part of the issue to dans point is that kernel does expect to be deployed in a vm with more ram then we have in our normal guest vms
23:48:06 melwitt sean-k-mooney[m]: this is a paste of the kernel panic if you may be able to tell what it means https://pastebin.com/raw/cVDem0Xr
23:48:32 melwitt I see
23:51:46 sean-k-mooney[m] is that q35 or pc i wonder
23:51:55 sean-k-mooney[m] i cant quite tell from that dmseg output
23:53:01 sean-k-mooney[m] its q35
23:53:19 sean-k-mooney[m] pcieport 0000:00:02.0: PME:
23:53:33 sean-k-mooney[m] so i wonder if we could mitigate this by plugging less pcie ports
23:54:07 melwitt it's from this nova-next fail https://0c0c4e33641a15d6198e-9e6a8447d6325ce608287fa851bc53b0.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/892800/3/gate/nova-next/4b8b450/testr_results.html
23:55:14 sean-k-mooney[m] ya so nova next is where we currently test q35
23:55:20 sean-k-mooney[m] and its the only job that uses q35
23:55:35 clarkb sean-k-mooney[m]: I wasn't aware the linux kernel publishes minimum memory requirements
23:55:51 clarkb and I definitely have run linux in less memory than the ci test nodes...
23:56:10 sean-k-mooney[m] clarkb linux does not canonical do for there images
23:56:37 sean-k-mooney[m] and ya puppy linux or tinycore or alpine
23:57:00 sean-k-mooney[m] all support much less but i think the lowest canonical support is 256
23:57:26 sean-k-mooney[m] maybe 128. that not just for the kernel of couse that for the full image with user space
23:57:46 melwitt it's also happening in other jobs but maybe for different reasons? example https://storage.gra.cloud.ovh.net/v1/AUTH_dcaab5e32b234d56b626f72581e3644c/zuul_opendev_logs_fe3/898188/16/check/tempest-integrated-storage/fe33fa7/testr_results.html
23:58:23 melwitt that ^ is not q35
23:59:05 JayF We run tinycore for Ironic test VMs, and already have automation for building test images, if that's something you all have interest in.
23:59:23 JayF https://opendev.org/openstack/ironic-python-agent-builder/src/branch/master/tinyipa
23:59:50 sean-k-mooney[m] https://ubuntu.com/core/docs/system-requirements so 256mb is there minim for there smallest image
23:59:50 JayF Obviously we have to put more in there than you all would, but if you go that route there's no need to stop from zero.
23:59:53 JayF s/stop/start/
#openstack-nova - 2023-11-29
00:01:02 sean-k-mooney[m] well its not exactly form 0 since i starded it like a year ago https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22alpine%22
00:01:29 sean-k-mooney[m] but ya we dont use much in the images an honestly i kind of wish tempest only used busybox or similar tools
00:01:47 sean-k-mooney[m] tineycore might be a bitt too spartan but it would be worth a try
00:02:06 sean-k-mooney[m] my alpine image does not have what needed for growpart
00:02:08 clarkb fwiw I don't expect the ubuntu kernel built for cirros to be that drastically different than another tiny kernel. They use the same source but rebuild to make it smaller and lightweight iirc
00:02:13 sean-k-mooney[m] so that was causing things to fail
00:02:36 JayF alpine does use musl libc, which can cause changes in behavior FWIW; but as I say that I realize I don't know if tinycore uses glibc :)
00:02:47 sean-k-mooney[m] clarkb: hum ok i tought the just unpacked the deb file without rebuilding

Earlier   Later