| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2025-02-21 | |||
| 03:18:43 | sean-k-mooney | its because tempest is not aware of 2.98 | |
| 03:18:59 | melwitt | ok. that makes sense then | |
| 03:19:00 | sean-k-mooney | and any test that uses 2.99 is going to fail if it does a server show i think | |
| 03:19:26 | melwitt | yeah I think you're right | |
| 03:21:28 | sean-k-mooney | given it 3:20 i shoudl probaly either go to bed or get a glass of wiskey | |
| 03:22:29 | sean-k-mooney | we could push a patch to tempest and then put a patch on top of the speice direct one to verify it fixes it | |
| 03:22:51 | melwitt | those are some choices lol | |
| 03:23:16 | melwitt | yeah. I could probably do that. I have done a tempest schema patch once before | |
| 03:23:16 | sean-k-mooney | i mean it clearly to late? early? for coffee | |
| 03:23:29 | melwitt | yeah. no coffee | |
| 03:29:12 | sean-k-mooney | ok so it kind of an issue with mikals tempest patch but only because the schemav299 tehy defiend does not have the image stuff | |
| 03:29:46 | sean-k-mooney | so we need to add a 2_98 and update https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/942023/3/tempest/lib/api_schema/response/compute/v2_99/servers.py#15 | |
| 03:29:51 | sean-k-mooney | to import that instead | |
| 03:30:32 | melwitt | ah ok | |
| 03:30:39 | sean-k-mooney | also when we hit 2.100 can we defien a 3.0 that is just 2.100 and move on withour lives | |
| 03:30:57 | melwitt | lol. that's ... a good point | |
| 03:31:23 | sean-k-mooney | it wouldnt be the first tiem we had a 3.0 ... | |
| 03:31:34 | melwitt | hah. yeah | |
| 03:32:19 | masahito | hi nova folks, please review the API bug fix for v2.96 and later version if you have time. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/939658 | |
| 03:33:05 | sean-k-mooney | oht he pined az | |
| 03:34:07 | masahito | yes :-) The show scheduler hint feature needs to follow similar change because it checks request_spec. | |
| 03:36:24 | sean-k-mooney | im currently ruminating on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/939658/6/nova/api/openstack/compute/views/servers.py#222 | |
| 03:36:39 | sean-k-mooney | syliticlly this annoys me but im tryign to decied if there is actully an issue | |
| 03:37:43 | sean-k-mooney | if i read that if cascade | |
| 03:38:14 | sean-k-mooney | it imples provided_az is either the litral boolean False or its a sting contiaing the az name | |
| 03:40:41 | sean-k-mooney | so the data type of provided_az is union(NONE|bool|str) | |
| 03:40:58 | masahito | yes, I also wondering it follows Nova's nice coding manner. The _get_pinned_az needs to identify 3 patterns as commented. | |
| 03:42:45 | sean-k-mooney | so None is only passe if show is invoed and prived_az is not passed | |
| 03:42:48 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/939658/6/nova/api/openstack/compute/views/servers.py#244 | |
| 03:42:54 | sean-k-mooney | correct? | |
| 03:43:04 | sean-k-mooney | in what case is false passed? | |
| 03:43:35 | masahito | right. | |
| 03:44:43 | masahito | fales is passed if list is invoked and no request_specs object to an instance | |
| 03:44:57 | sean-k-mooney | ah | |
| 03:45:13 | sean-k-mooney | it woudl be nice if None was passed then | |
| 03:45:31 | sean-k-mooney | thats form here right https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/939658/6/nova/api/openstack/compute/views/servers.py#539 | |
| 03:46:08 | sean-k-mooney | if we change req_specs_dict.get(server.uuid, False) to req_specs_dict.get(server.uuid, None) | |
| 03:47:27 | sean-k-mooney | im trying to decide if that allows use to simplfy the if | |
| 03:48:06 | sean-k-mooney | it would allow use toe get rid of the first two brances and jsut replace it with pinned_az = provided_az | |
| 03:48:29 | sean-k-mooney | but the else woudl have to become if pinned_az is None: | |
| 03:48:34 | masahito | but in that case, _get_pinned_az can't identify pre-fetheched None in list or no input in show. | |
| 03:48:58 | masahito | s/no input in show/no input None in show/ | |
| 03:48:58 | sean-k-mooney | sure but im trying to decied if that matters | |
| 03:49:46 | sean-k-mooney | if we dont have a request spec then it cant be pinned | |
| 03:49:52 | masahito | i see. | |
| 03:50:41 | sean-k-mooney | im not sayign you should change this | |
| 03:51:00 | sean-k-mooney | im trying to undersand the desing chooices that lead to this current patch | |
| 03:51:29 | sean-k-mooney | "if provided_az is False:" is very specific and odd | |
| 03:51:30 | masahito | thanks for the follow up. my reply is one previous your message. | |
| 03:51:39 | sean-k-mooney | you are using False as a sential | |
| 03:51:51 | sean-k-mooney | but it might be better to actuly create a new sentail object instead | |
| 03:51:55 | sean-k-mooney | and use that instead | |
| 03:52:09 | sean-k-mooney | so its clear what its role is | |
| 03:52:40 | masahito | like a empty request_spec object instead of False? | |
| 03:52:56 | sean-k-mooney | no | |
| 03:53:07 | sean-k-mooney | so at teh module level define sentinel = object() | |
| 03:53:40 | sean-k-mooney | then do req_specs_dict.get(server.uuid, sentinel) here | |
| 03:53:42 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/939658/6/nova/api/openstack/compute/views/servers.py#539 | |
| 03:54:03 | sean-k-mooney | and if provided_az is sentinel: | |
| 03:54:05 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/939658/6/nova/api/openstack/compute/views/servers.py#222 | |
| 03:55:18 | sean-k-mooney | rather then using the singleton False object create your own | |
| 03:55:33 | sean-k-mooney | you can give it a descriptive name | |
| 03:55:55 | sean-k-mooney | AZ_NOT_IN_REQUEST_SEPC = obejct() | |
| 03:55:56 | masahito | I may get your point. at the first if-condition checks the provided_az is the sentinel object or not. | |
| 03:56:08 | sean-k-mooney | right | |
| 03:56:16 | sean-k-mooney | basiclly https://python-patterns.guide/python/sentinel-object/#sentinel-objects | |
| 03:57:54 | sean-k-mooney | ill leave a comment to this effect and also +1 | |
| 03:58:17 | sean-k-mooney | letss see if others care one way or the other | |
| 03:59:23 | masahito | Let me update to use the sentinel. I don't think it difficult change. | |
| 03:59:33 | sean-k-mooney | sure | |
| 04:07:18 | opendevreview | Masahito Muroi proposed openstack/nova master: Use dict object for request_specs_dict in the _list_view https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/939658 | |
| 04:10:35 | masahito | updated. thanks | |
| 04:10:54 | sean-k-mooney | i have one nit in the release note but im +2 | |
| 04:38:38 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: im not sure if you wrote that patch or not but im actully got to head to sleep now, enjoy whats left of your evnening | |
| 04:39:19 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: no not yet. gnight o/ | |
| 04:57:43 | sshmlbrg | sean-k-mooney: o/ | |
| 05:30:27 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: only show standard image propeties in server show. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/942413 | |
| 05:30:44 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: ^ that shoudl fix | |
| 05:30:49 | sean-k-mooney | https://launchpad.net/bugs/2098384 | |
| 05:33:05 | sean-k-mooney | well maybe not | |
| 05:33:15 | sean-k-mooney | this is ligtly diffent damb it | |
| 05:35:50 | sean-k-mooney | well that fixes a bug but it might only be a partial fix | |
| 05:55:42 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Extend image-properties-in-server-show spec with rebuild https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/940360 | |
| 06:59:21 | mikal | sean-k-mooney / melwitt: there is this WIP tempest patch for v2.98 -- https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/939375 | |
| 06:59:57 | mikal | I am a little surprised its not in merge conflict now though. | |
| 07:12:21 | mikal | Oh wait, that's the _other_ _other_ competitor for v2.98? Is there any existing attempt at testing for v2.98? If it changed the schema how did it merge without any tempest tests? | |
| 07:12:51 | mikal | I am confused enough that I am going to stop and think about this some more. | |
| 07:18:42 | mikal | I cannot find a proposed tempest change for the code which landed as v2.98. | |
| 07:42:31 | opendevreview | Johannes Kulik proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: fix maxphysaddr passthrough dom parsing https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/942371 | |
| 08:36:07 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: I saw your comments on the image properties patch and your fix patch. I assume that means I should hold off on trying any tempest schema patch for 2.98 for the moment if there is some bug in the API response? | |
| 08:39:21 | ratailor | sean-k-mooney, you around ? | |
| 08:40:27 | sshmlbrg | ratailor: he's sleeping | |
| 08:41:33 | ratailor | sshmlbrg, ack. Thanks! | |
| 10:23:01 | opendevreview | Rajesh Tailor proposed openstack/nova master: only show standard image properties in server show. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/942413 | |
| 11:11:48 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: it does not change teh schema becuase in the schema its just a dict of sting | |
| 11:41:21 | opendevreview | Vasyl Saienko proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Expose vlan trunking in metadata/configdrive https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/471815 | |
| 12:04:15 | nisha | hi nova folks, please review the one line bug fix for port after live migration if you have time. thank you! https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/936338 | |
| 12:04:42 | sean-k-mooney | nisha: that not a trivile change | |
| 12:05:05 | sean-k-mooney | i skimmed it when you first pushed it and i did have tiem to fully load all the context | |
| 12:06:48 | sean-k-mooney | there are some filed that should be diffent between the souce and dest | |