| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2025-03-12 | |||
| 17:35:38 | gibi | also the PCI claim happens outside of the move claim for live migration therefore that always happen correctly even for non NUMA aware VMs and for non PCI in Placement enabled | |
| 17:36:24 | gibi | this is a bit of a mess but a well behaving mess :) | |
| 17:42:06 | Uggla | in French we have an expression for this: "C'est tombé en marche". :) | |
| 17:50:35 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: i belive the check in the move claim for pci devicve is for cold migration | |
| 17:52:23 | sean-k-mooney | oh maybe im wrong | |
| 17:53:46 | sean-k-mooney | ok no it was checking but it was inherited form the base claim | |
| 17:54:35 | sean-k-mooney | and it was modifed for the live migration case | |
| 17:55:21 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla: gibi so ya we can likely drop https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/claims.py#L209-L233 now | |
| 17:55:42 | sean-k-mooney | well | |
| 17:56:26 | sean-k-mooney | if we rely on the conducotr to validate that all teh request from the flavor are live migrtable | |
| 17:56:33 | Uggla | sean-k-mooney, it is what I have done. But we were a bit afraid to not hit that code before. | |
| 17:57:11 | sean-k-mooney | you have ad a patch up for that for a long time no? | |
| 17:57:22 | sean-k-mooney | i tought i looked at a patch for this like 2 weeks ago | |
| 17:57:22 | Uggla | sean-k-mooney, fyi https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944105 | |
| 17:58:15 | Uggla | sean-k-mooney, no created it only today. | |
| 17:58:31 | sean-k-mooney | i guess im thinking fo the conducotr change | |
| 17:59:15 | sean-k-mooney | this https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/942146/7/nova/conductor/tasks/live_migrate.py#244 | |
| 17:59:42 | Uggla | oh yes sorry. | |
| 17:59:52 | sean-k-mooney | how were you teting this without that change in the move claims? | |
| 18:01:26 | sean-k-mooney | oh | |
| 18:01:27 | Uggla | This was tested with a unit tests and the fn tests were ok because all the live migration tests were done without numa VM. | |
| 18:01:45 | sean-k-mooney | no but you tested this manually | |
| 18:01:49 | sean-k-mooney | with real hardware | |
| 18:02:05 | sean-k-mooney | oh.... | |
| 18:02:14 | Uggla | not real hardware was fine too, because I use a non numa vm. | |
| 18:02:20 | sean-k-mooney | that why gibi was askign about numa | |
| 18:02:39 | sean-k-mooney | that move claim code was orgianl ment to work for non numa instance too... | |
| 18:02:52 | sean-k-mooney | i guess that was just alway broken then | |
| 18:02:59 | Uggla | yep, I discovered that this morning, then "pass" the ball to gibi. | |
| 18:03:15 | sean-k-mooney | got it | |
| 18:03:38 | sean-k-mooney | for the record i still hate everyting about claims and still want to burn them with fire | |
| 18:03:39 | Uggla | because I could not understand why it was working fine without numa and failed with numa. | |
| 18:05:16 | sean-k-mooney | you should see this fail in the funtional test if you enabled hugepages or cpu pinning | |
| 18:05:22 | sean-k-mooney | we can add test coverage for that | |
| 18:05:27 | Uggla | @sean-k-mooney, ha ha, openstack claims game of thrones. | |
| 18:05:57 | Uggla | I saw the issue with the new fn tests this morning, because I enabled cpu pinning. | |
| 18:06:08 | sean-k-mooney | i strongly objected to extending claims when we added numa live migration which is why i didnt use them when adding sriov live migration in the same cycle | |
| 18:06:22 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla: oh ok cool | |
| 18:09:34 | Uggla | sean-k-mooney, in fact I leverage "your" test_live_migrate_server_with_neutron to do a mix test with port request and flavor based request. | |
| 18:10:26 | bauzas | cores, I need your help for paperwork changes RC1 : https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/943948 | |
| 18:10:36 | bauzas | ditto for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/943952 | |
| 18:10:49 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla: shoudl we be keepign this https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944105/1/nova/tests/unit/compute/test_claims.py#b375 but updating it to show it nolonger raise | |
| 18:11:06 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: im going to finish soon but ill take a look now | |
| 18:11:29 | bauzas | also, I'd like cores to review our cycle highlights https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/943801 | |
| 18:11:52 | bauzas | and nothing urgent but I'd appreciate https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/944019 | |
| 18:13:20 | bauzas | and we need a second core for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/942871 (libvirt/qemu bump) | |
| 18:13:22 | Uggla | bauzas, reminder about 942871: Bump MIN_{LIBVIRT,QEMU} for "Epoxy" | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/942871 to not forget it. | |
| 18:13:40 | bauzas | Uggla: jinxed ! | |
| 18:13:55 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: you havnt updated https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/943801/2/deliverables/epoxy/nova.yaml based on what already there | |
| 18:14:19 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: that's litterally my next action item | |
| 18:14:26 | sean-k-mooney | ah | |
| 18:14:27 | bauzas | even at 7:15pm | |
| 18:15:34 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: i have reviewd everything except the libvirt bump ill take a look at that now | |
| 18:15:48 | bauzas | <3 | |
| 18:16:05 | bauzas | I'll write the prelude patch tomorrow morning | |
| 18:17:53 | Uggla | bauzas, keep a little bandwith tomorrow morning to review the fup for Vf live migration. | |
| 18:18:02 | sean-k-mooney | so the bump patch is split in two right, the first does the bump and then https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/942872/2 is a follow up to drop the supprot for the older versions | |
| 18:18:21 | sean-k-mooney | so we can merge the bump and come back to the WIP patch next cycle yes | |
| 18:19:01 | Uggla | sean-k-mooney, yes. | |
| 18:19:36 | sean-k-mooney | ok i have appoved that as well and rechecked it for the timeouts | |
| 18:21:05 | Uggla | sean-k-mooney, I was running out of time for doing the cleanup this cycle. | |
| 18:21:34 | sean-k-mooney | thats ok. once we have signaled the new min version and updated the constants | |
| 18:21:43 | sean-k-mooney | the agent will check for the new min verison and report it | |
| 18:21:55 | sean-k-mooney | so we shoudl be fine | |
| 18:22:24 | Uggla | I hope too | |
| 18:26:35 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Move Epoxy implemented specs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/944019 | |
| 18:47:11 | bauzas | updated the cycle highlights : https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/943801 | |
| 18:49:22 | opendevreview | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Support "one-time-use" PCI devices https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/943816 | |
| 18:49:22 | opendevreview | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Extend invalidate_rp to only invalidate cache https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944148 | |
| 18:49:23 | opendevreview | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Invalidate PCI-in-placement cached RPs during claim https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944149 | |
| 20:42:11 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: FUP Update pci-passthrough and virtual-gpu documentation https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944153 | |
| 21:02:09 | opendevreview | Steve Baker proposed openstack/nova master: Add VNC console support for the Ironic driver https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/942528 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2025-03-13 | |||
| 10:47:18 | bauzas | gentle reminder that we have a couple of open patches that we need to merge before RC1 : https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-epoxy-rc-potential | |
| 10:47:40 | bauzas | also, I'll be off today after noon CET (ie. in 15 mins) | |
| 12:11:50 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: FUP improve and add integration tests for PCI SR-IOV servers https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944106 | |
| 12:11:51 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: FUP Add a warning to make non-explicit live migration request debugging easier https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944133 | |
| 12:11:51 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: FUP Update pci-passthrough and virtual-gpu documentation https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944153 | |
| 12:32:34 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: doc: mark the maximum microversion for 2025.1 Epoxy https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/943948 | |
| 13:21:52 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Reproduce bug/2098496 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/941673 | |
| 13:37:19 | opendevreview | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add one-time-use-devices spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/943486 | |
| 13:37:56 | dansmith | bauzas: typo fix, if you could ^ | |
| 13:38:20 | dansmith | melwitt: I still think your +1 on that is useful if you want to re-add it (and I don't blame you, this is trial-by-PCI fire for me) | |
| 14:29:06 | opendevreview | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add one-time-use devices docs and reno https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944262 | |
| 15:29:44 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Reproduce bug/2098496 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/941673 | |
| 15:29:44 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Ignore metadata tags in pci/stats _find_pool logic https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944277 | |
| 15:31:13 | gibi | dansmith: just an FYI. This ^^ is the bugfix in the PCI in Placement codepath that fixes double allocations due to pool breakup | |
| 15:31:59 | dansmith | um, you say that like I should have context on that issue.. did we discuss this before? | |
| 15:32:16 | gibi | yepp in our last sprint planning downstream ;) | |
| 15:32:25 | gibi | you were interested in reviewing it | |
| 15:32:48 | gibi | the main issue is that if you have like 2 VFs per a single PF | |
| 15:32:52 | dansmith | okay I shall refresh myself :D | |
| 15:33:19 | gibi | and boot a VM requesting 1 VF, then delete the VM, and boot again the second VM will get 2 VFs instead of one | |
| 15:33:34 | dansmith | oh right right sorry | |
| 15:34:07 | gibi | the way the pci stats device pooling interacts with the placement driven PCI allocation leads some broken assumptions | |
| 15:34:43 | gibi | causing that the two VFs are broken up into two pools but both refer to the same placement RP | |
| 15:35:10 | gibi | while the other side of the code assumes that devices from a same RP are always in the same pool | |
| 15:35:54 | dansmith | I totally remember the conversation now, yep | |
| 15:36:07 | gibi | now both side of the code is improved. i) we avoid breaking up the pool ii) even if the pool is broken up in the future the other side of the code will be more graceful | |
| 15:36:27 | gibi | and not just allocate the same amount from each pool | |
| 15:45:04 | dansmith | okay I skimmed the repro thing.. I need to go learn about the pooling as I have a big gap there.. I'm also surprised this affects placement, but I guess because of some healing | |