Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2024-11-07
08:22:29 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.2: Route shared storage RPC to evac dest at startup https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934302
08:24:38 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.1: Reproduce bug 2085975 in functional https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934303
08:24:39 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.1: Route shared storage RPC to evac dest at startup https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934304
08:26:06 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.2: Reproduce bug 2085975 in functional https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934305
08:26:07 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.2: Route shared storage RPC to evac dest at startup https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934306
08:28:29 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.1: Reproduce bug 2085975 in functional https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934308
08:28:30 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/2023.1: Route shared storage RPC to evac dest at startup https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934309
09:57:14 chris218 Hi guys, how does stuff defined in api/validation/extra_specs translate to virt/libvirt/config? I'm trying to figure out how os_boot_dev is set in LibvirtConfigGuest since it can't be used with boot_order in LibvirtConfigGuestDisk
10:26:20 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/os-vif master: mypy: Add type annotations https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/745162
10:30:59 sean-k-mooney chris218: it mostly does not. api/validation/extra_specs is just chekcing of the extra spec values are valid at the api level to determin if we shoudl reject the request early when you are defining a flavor and setting the extra specs
10:31:19 sean-k-mooney the xml generation is entirly seperate
10:33:11 sean-k-mooney os_boot_dev is not an extra spec or image property, we do not support configing which device is bootable. its either the root disk or the rescue disk
10:34:12 chris218 Yea but stuff like hw:boot_menu then translates to os_bootmenu, right?
10:34:47 sean-k-mooney it can yes, we intentionally do not expose everyting a hypervior can configure
10:36:59 sean-k-mooney chris218: is there a partical reason your interested in modifying the boot dev
10:37:48 chris218 I'm still playing with the idea of exposing network booting through some flavor extra spec
10:38:19 sean-k-mooney ah the last time this came up i suggested adding it as a property on the neutron port
10:38:33 chris218 I see that libvirt supports <boot order="X"> on interfaces
10:38:34 sean-k-mooney basicaly just adding a boot flag to a port
10:39:00 chris218 Yea
10:39:03 sean-k-mooney if you use the boot menu today you can network boot already
10:39:39 sean-k-mooney neuton can set the tftp server info in the dhcp repsonce on the port too
10:39:40 chris218 You'd have to select it manually first though
10:39:47 sean-k-mooney yes you would
10:40:42 sean-k-mooney the thing is nova does not currently suppprot creating a vm wihtout a glance image or a cinder volume.
10:40:55 sean-k-mooney so you would have to deal with that ux as well
10:41:52 chris218 Last time I asked about it somebody suggested using rescue image with it pxe but downside of this is that unrescuing is kind of inflexible and you can't power off and then unrescue server
10:43:03 sean-k-mooney we could supprot unrescue to stopped
10:43:21 sean-k-mooney i belive it curretly returns you to active if the server was active before
15:33:14 s3rj1k Hi all, would this RFA https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2086867 need an actual spec or specless blueprint is enough?
15:36:54 gibi s3rj1k: If it has an API impact, requires DB schema change, or has an upgrade impact then you need a spec. Otherwise it would make sense to propose it as a specless bp and put it on the agenda of some upcoming nova meeting.
15:37:30 gibi and we can discuss it on the meeting if it is simple enough to accept it as specless
15:40:33 s3rj1k gibi: it adds a config option but other than that it's pretty much a small change, can we assume it's specless and in case if it is not I will do spec for it later? After upcoming nova meeting
15:42:40 gibi s3rj1k: yeah, that approach make sense
15:43:14 gibi lets assume it is specless until the meeting discussion
15:44:49 s3rj1k gibi: great thanks, also when/where is the community meeting will take place?
15:47:16 s3rj1k Tuesdays 16:00 UTC (#openstack-nova on OFTC) ?
15:52:58 gibi s3rj1k: correct. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova
15:53:26 gibi you can add you blueprint to the agenda by editing that page
15:53:39 gibi please add it to the Open discussion section
15:57:43 gibi bauzas: ^^ fyi
16:02:15 s3rj1k gibi: done, thanks for walking me through the formalities
16:07:46 sean-k-mooney im not sure if this need a code change
16:08:01 sean-k-mooney dont we already have the ablity to specify the migration and livemigration inbound adress
16:08:17 sean-k-mooney if you set those to an ip then nova will use the ip for scp too i belive
16:08:47 sean-k-mooney https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html#libvirt.live_migration_inbound_addr and https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html#libvirt.migration_inbound_addr
16:10:00 sean-k-mooney s3rj1k: ^
16:40:26 s3rj1k sean-k-mooney: I'll try to verify this before meetup, thanks for heads-up
17:41:43 sean-k-mooney bauzas: can you add https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bug/2074219%22 to your review queue in the morning
#openstack-nova - 2024-11-08
01:46:34 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Re-propose config option for behavior of unset unified limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/934391
01:54:01 melwitt bauzas: just fyi it appears the openstack-tox-docs job on the nova-specs repo is broken. not sure what changed, I'm guessing something with sphinx?
01:54:36 sean-k-mooney melwitt: what python version did you use
01:55:13 melwitt sean-k-mooney: I have 3.10.12 but it's failing in the gate also for the same failure
01:55:49 sean-k-mooney ok im fixing a py3.9 comaptiblity issue with the openstackdoctheme
01:56:59 melwitt sean-k-mooney: oh, nice. it looks like in the gate it is 3.9 https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/71de468bcd5b419994f13b8bcff71f16/log/job-output.txt#440 so likely to be fixed with your fix I expect
01:57:16 sean-k-mooney this is not the bug im fixing
01:57:48 sean-k-mooney we build with warnings threaded as errors
01:57:48 melwitt oh
01:57:50 sean-k-mooney https://paste.opendev.org/show/bsKc2Q1VihOwLG5Czvd4/
01:58:23 melwitt yeah. this just seems recent but I guess I hadn't noticed
01:58:26 sean-k-mooney so ya a new sphinx release happend on Oct 13, 2024
01:58:40 sean-k-mooney so i think those are just new warnings that should be simple enough to fix
01:58:57 melwitt someone might have already proposed a fix. checking..
01:59:56 melwitt hm no, doesn't look like it https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/nova-specs+is:open
01:59:56 sean-k-mooney this is my docsthme patch in case your interested https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstackdocstheme/+/934384
02:00:44 melwitt ah cool
02:05:37 sean-k-mooney im going to go to sleep quickly but ill just confirm i can repodcue the issues locally. do you plan ot fix them or will i?
02:06:31 melwitt sean-k-mooney: up to you. I don't know what the footnote warning means off the top of my head
02:06:55 melwitt so it might be faster if you do it
02:07:32 melwitt hah. that's cause nova-specs renders everything from the beginning of time
02:08:13 sean-k-mooney an with that done its a perfect time to rememeber tha ton py39 we clamp to an older version of sphinx
02:08:41 sean-k-mooney on the plus side is this deffinly just a problem because a new version was released
02:08:51 melwitt goes back to at least juno
02:10:03 sean-k-mooney i vagly remember the before times of the nova wiki
02:10:24 sean-k-mooney it was confusing when they were first being intoduced but it was a big imporvement in the end
02:10:28 melwitt oh yeah
02:22:18 sean-k-mooney so the problem seems to be that ehre are a missmatch in the number of footnotes defiend vs used.
02:22:42 sean-k-mooney we use a footnote by doing [#]_ allows use to not have to name the link
02:23:04 sean-k-mooney we define it by doing .. [#] <linke goes here>
02:23:25 sean-k-mooney if we look at /home/smooney/repos/nova-specs/doc/source/specs/queens/implemented/multi-attach-volume.rst:304: WARNING: Footnote [#] is not referenced. [ref.footnote]
02:23:39 sean-k-mooney there are 4 footnotes but only 3 are used in the doc
02:24:01 melwitt ahhh
02:24:31 sean-k-mooney im going to head to bed but i can take a look in the morning assuming you dont get to it tonight
02:24:53 sean-k-mooney it shoudl be pretty simple to fix we just need to figure out where the extra one shoudl go and or delete it
02:24:54 melwitt ok, seeya tomorrow o/
08:25:07 zigo I upgraded to latest point release of Nova for both Antelope and Bobcat, in both case, when running unit tests, I get the OOM killer saying hello ...
08:25:15 zigo Any clue what unit test is using so much RAM ?
08:32:57 gibi zigo: interesting we did not noticed that in the upstream gate. What are the memory limits in your env?
08:33:15 zigo I run my jenkins package building with 8 GB of RAM.
08:33:44 gibi thanks I will try to check it in 8G VM then :)
08:33:46 zigo There's Jenkins itself taking a bit of RAM of course, but like 6 GB at least should be available for the unit tests, I'm guessing.
08:34:07 zigo FYI, I've run latest point release exactly, not tip of stable branches.
08:34:09 gibi what level of parallelism do you use in your env?
08:34:53 zigo I have 4 VCPU, so I'm guessing, 4 threads for running tests.
08:35:43 zigo When I look in "top" with the server being idle, I have only 1.2 GB used by my Jenkins env.
08:35:53 zigo So that's 6.8 GB available for building.
08:37:54 gibi ack
08:47:17 frickler zigo: the CI nodes also use only 8GB, so likely some other delta. can you share the complete oom and the test output? I assume this is on bookworm? we could try to test with that in CI instead of noble/jammy
08:47:43 zigo Yes, I'm running on Bookworm, with a chroot & sbuild.
08:54:15 zigo frickler: It killed "java" (ie: my jenkins...), so you wont see anything in the OOM kill log.

Earlier   Later