Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2024-08-20
13:45:11 tkajinam sean-k-mooney, I'm fixing it now. However the current blocker appears in the rescue API call so that line is not related
13:45:32 opendevreview Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Launch instances with stateless firmware https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/908890
13:46:29 sean-k-mooney ok so rescue is your main consern https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/908890/16/nova/tests/functional/libvirt/test_stateless_firmware.py#208
13:46:40 sean-k-mooney ill quickly pull that review and see what happens locally
14:09:30 sean-k-mooney tkajinam: so rescue is failing beucase the test is tryign to open the unrescue_xml_path i.e. its tryign to write to disk
14:09:53 sean-k-mooney tkajinam: so there is a missing mock somewhere
14:10:02 sean-k-mooney https://paste.opendev.org/show/bCsw4SkPFosMTi0pL4yd/
14:13:21 tkajinam I was wondering why that instance directory is not created but it might be because fake libvirt driver is used. hmm... there are no rescue functional tests with fake libvirt driver now so I may need to look into additional mocking to make the process pass
14:14:48 sean-k-mooney there are https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/0b091179d575a5e7cff9cd76223a8016cfbbc019/nova/tests/functional/libvirt/test_rescue_deleted_base.py
14:15:10 sean-k-mooney but but its doing https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/0b091179d575a5e7cff9cd76223a8016cfbbc019/nova/tests/functional/libvirt/test_rescue_deleted_base.py#L48-L57
14:15:20 tkajinam ahhh
14:17:31 sean-k-mooney if i add that
14:17:47 sean-k-mooney then it fails with https://paste.opendev.org/show/bLajZLL1mJueSgMkPNAQ/
14:18:00 sean-k-mooney but that might just be an issue with the assert
14:18:29 tkajinam yeah. rescue uses the image without stateless firmware so that assertion is wrong
14:19:08 sean-k-mooney ok well i trust you can figure out how to fix that
14:19:19 sean-k-mooney ill quickly look at why the live migration test is failing
14:19:50 sean-k-mooney TypeError: Can't upgrade a READER transaction to a WRITER mid-transaction
14:20:02 sean-k-mooney that od
14:21:03 sean-k-mooney i feel like you just missing the migration stub or soemthign liek that
14:21:37 sean-k-mooney no you have the corret mixin
14:24:03 opendevreview Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Launch instances with stateless firmware https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/908890
14:25:25 tkajinam sean-k-mooney, sorry but where did you find that type error ?
14:26:44 tkajinam the remaining problem with live migration tests is that the xml content generated by fake libvirt driver does not contain any loader related fields and it's not possible to assert that these fields are passed in destination_xml. https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/0b091179d575a5e7cff9cd76223a8016cfbbc019/nova/tests/fixtures/libvirt.py#L1565-L1568
14:27:10 sean-k-mooney im running it in an IDE but you can get it to print by adding OS_DEBUG=1 to your tox command
14:27:45 tkajinam I can technically extend the implementation to simulate more detailed behavior but I'm inclined to look into whitebox tests instead of importing more libvirt's behaviors into that fixture
14:27:48 tkajinam ah, ok
14:30:56 sean-k-mooney oh weird
14:31:03 sean-k-mooney ok it passes if i run it with stestr
14:31:41 sean-k-mooney i.e. OS_DEBUG=1 stestr --test-path=./nova/tests/functional run -- LibvirtStatelessFirmwareTest.test_live_migrate_server
14:34:38 opendevreview Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Launch instances with stateless firmware https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/908890
14:35:33 sean-k-mooney so that test only fails when i run it form my ide which might be related to how im runing it since im not using stestr and i kind of hacked it to work
14:36:12 tkajinam yeah
14:36:13 tkajinam https://paste.opendev.org/show/bsFDSlO0e6ZaLcsTFX2g/
14:36:22 tkajinam at least that test passes in my env with OS_DEBUG=1
14:36:53 sean-k-mooney if it passes in ci thats the main thing
14:36:59 sean-k-mooney ill test v18 now
14:37:27 sean-k-mooney cool all 8 pass under stestr
14:40:42 sean-k-mooney i didnt run all the funcitonal tests but all the libvirt ones pass locally
14:41:14 sean-k-mooney im goig to grab a drink but ill take a look at the current version when i get back
14:44:35 tkajinam sean-k-mooney, thanks... I've added a few comments to explain a few context behind current test coverage which hopefully helps that review...
15:31:12 sean-k-mooney some of those comments are incorrect. in general i think most of the real code changes look correct and the unit test coverage is fine
15:31:31 sean-k-mooney i think the functiontional coverage can be impvoed but its reasonably close
15:31:45 sean-k-mooney to what we woudl need to merge this
17:12:05 opendevreview Masahito Muroi proposed openstack/nova master: Use boot_roles_count and boot_role_ key for system_metadata https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/925163
21:49:31 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Fix deepcopy usage for BlockDeviceMapping in get_root_info https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/920374
#openstack-nova - 2024-08-21
00:19:29 mikal sean-k-mooney: how do I delineate what is the object change vs everything else? For example for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924844 are we literally saying just pull the nova/objects/console_auth_token.py bit and associated tests out into its own change?
00:21:08 sean-k-mooney[m] yep more or less jut that and the test
00:21:45 sean-k-mooney[m] normally also the notificaotn object change
00:21:58 sean-k-mooney[m] but in this case you dont have a notifiction object change
00:23:33 sean-k-mooney[m] as i said this is really 3 patches in one. im not genrally against that but its an object change followed by the db change followed by the rest
01:19:23 mikal sean-k-mooney: I can give that a go... I'll start with the nova console change instead of the extra spec one I think though. Give me a day or two.
01:52:29 opendevreview Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Launch instances with stateless firmware https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/908890
02:33:28 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: Fix deepcopy usage for BlockDeviceMapping in get_root_info https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/920374
03:41:22 opendevreview Zhang Hua proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.1: Fix deepcopy usage for BlockDeviceMapping in get_root_info https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/926696
03:44:02 opendevreview Zhang Hua proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.2: Fix deepcopy usage for BlockDeviceMapping in get_root_info https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/926697
03:46:29 opendevreview Zhang Hua proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.1: Fix deepcopy usage for BlockDeviceMapping in get_root_info https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/926698
06:16:51 opendevreview Masahito Muroi proposed openstack/nova master: Use boot_roles_count and boot_role_ key for system_metadata https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/925163
06:46:13 opendevreview Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: Reproducer test for image property hw_architecture https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/926128
06:46:14 opendevreview Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: Libvirt: updates resource provider trait list https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/926521
06:46:14 opendevreview Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: VMware: updates resource provider trait list https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/926522
06:46:15 opendevreview Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: zvm: updates resource provider trait list https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/926523
06:46:15 opendevreview Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: WIP Ironic: updates resource provider trait list https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/926524
08:06:48 IPO Hello all !
08:11:52 IPO sean-k-mooney: Hello, Sean! What do you think: is there a chance to review and comment the fix: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/923395
10:00:32 sean-k-mooney[m] IPO: im kind of conflicted, i personally dont really think that feature should exist in nova
10:00:52 sean-k-mooney[m] the global version specifically
10:01:29 sean-k-mooney[m] because it allow you to probe for information you otherwise should not have. i.e. the hostname of other tenants vms
10:03:44 sean-k-mooney[m] the way the fix is proposed its also pretty expensive
10:04:48 sean-k-mooney[m] every instqance create would result in a db query to alll cells.
10:07:11 IPO sean-k-mooney: Thank you for comment. Interesting point. But in this case maybe the some way of variant, which was proposed earlier, should been implemented. But this will allow to check VMs name in one cell, but for all projects, which is not allowed either
10:09:32 IPO sean-k-mooney: And finally it looks like this feature maybe be cancelled at all as a potential security risk ?
10:11:19 sean-k-mooney[m] what use case made you interested in supporting this across cells?
10:17:27 IPO sean-k-mooney: Good question ! Basically we don't use cells in prods and some case of fix, implemented before (https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860938) suits our needs. But there was the comment that we need fix to check it for all cells. Thant is why we start to impliment new fix
10:19:30 sean-k-mooney[m] thats not quite what i was asking. why to you enable project or global uniquness?
10:19:53 sean-k-mooney[m] the security issue is minor and its something that deployers opt into for there cloud
10:20:36 sean-k-mooney[m] thats why im not -1, the operator made a delibverate choice to opt in
10:20:57 sean-k-mooney[m] i could understand why this was useful for nova networks
10:21:10 sean-k-mooney[m] so that all vms had a unique fqdn
10:21:37 sean-k-mooney[m] but with neutron and designate im not sure what the usecase for global or project uniqness is
10:25:58 sean-k-mooney[m] IPO: if other cores think this should be supported and fixed then thats fine we can proceed with the patch its just not something i personally think we should spend time on but if you have a usecase that needs it i dont want to block that
10:26:30 sean-k-mooney[m] i just dont really want to invest much of my time in advocating for it when i dont really belive in it
10:34:23 IPO sean-k-mooney: thank you for extra comments. I have clear view of your point of view about this issue. One of reasons we faced - we have naming convention for VMs. It is maintained by our self-made portal. But there is extra ability to work with cloud - via CLI or API and we can't control names users can choose for VMs
10:42:02 IPO sean-k-mooney: I will try to collect additional reasons with our team, to have more items in list.
11:05:08 IPO sean-k-mooney: Thank you, Sean! I will return to this topic as soon as will have additional info. Have a good day !
11:05:29 sean-k-mooney ok
11:05:58 sean-k-mooney as i said its just not a priority for me but if others are happy to proceed then im ok with that
11:12:21 IPO sean-k-mooney: ok, I see, thank you for your time.
11:55:19 opendevreview Jan Gutter proposed openstack/placement master: DNM -- testing fix in external PR https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/926743
12:02:16 sean-k-mooney gmann: melwitt: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/925163 is a fairly simple review if ye have time later
12:18:14 opendevreview Jan Gutter proposed openstack/placement master: DNM -- testing fix in external PR https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/926743
13:52:34 opendevreview Jan Gutter proposed openstack/placement master: DNM -- testing fix in external PR https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/926743
15:30:08 stephenfin Just for lolz, I attempted to create a BDM with boot_index=0 and destination_type=local (i.e. the root disk). Nova ignores/overwrites it. Is the fact that it accepts it in the first place a bug in our validation code?
15:30:12 stephenfin e.g. https://paste.openstack.org/show/bFOXilnynfyoGM2CCp7v/
15:30:30 stephenfin (that's the output from my hacked OSC)
15:41:53 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova stable/2023.2: Disconnecting volume from the compute host https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/911396
15:55:10 melwitt sean-k-mooney: fyi in case you missed it, I updated https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bp/unified-limits-nova-unset-limits%22+is:open+project:openstack/nova after we chatted about [workarounds] and a release note
15:58:19 sean-k-mooney stephenfin: i dont think that is a bug
15:58:28 sean-k-mooney the bdm are not just for cinder
15:59:01 sean-k-mooney you use them ot create multiple ephermaal disk, swap disk and for the root disk

Earlier   Later