Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2025-05-15
16:59:10 sean-k-mooney gibi: well there is also the gil
16:59:18 sean-k-mooney but we doen really want to rely on that
17:00:04 gibi I don't see who can you create a lock in the module level code that is threadsafe and ensured to be only created once
17:00:10 gibi a/who/how/
17:00:57 gibi if lock not is None: lock = createLock() # is not thread safe
17:01:40 gibi it is only threadsafe as there is an explicit import lock in python so we know that the module level code only run by a single thread uninterupted
17:02:04 gibi but with that we can have just an applicaton is None check, no need to any other locks
17:12:11 gibi https://docs.python.org/fr/3.8/library/imp.html#imp.lock_held
17:13:43 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Use futurist for _get_default_green_pool() https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948072
17:13:44 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Replace utils.spawn_n with spawn https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948076
17:13:44 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Add spawn_on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948079
17:13:45 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Move ComputeManager to use spawn_on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948186
17:13:45 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Move ConductorManager to use spawn_on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948187
17:13:46 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Make nova.utils.pass_context private https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948188
17:13:46 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Rename DEFAULT_GREEN_POOL to DEFAULT_EXECUTOR https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948086
17:13:47 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Make the default executor configurable https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948087
17:13:47 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Print ThreadPool statistics https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948340
17:13:49 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Document threading mode and tuneables https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/949364
17:13:49 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: allow service to start with threading https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948311
17:13:51 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: DNM:Run nova-next with n-sch in threading mode https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948450
17:52:47 cardoe hey all. I see you don't have https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/471815 on your roadmap for 2025.2
17:52:52 cardoe Any chance we can get that added?
17:53:10 cardoe There's a number of operators that are using Ironic with Nova and need trunk port data.
17:53:55 cardoe The actual implementation of that was proposed by two different companies against nova.
17:54:15 cardoe I've gotten everyone to collapse down behind Vasyl's patch and he's updated the spec as asked.
17:55:17 cardoe There's a push on doing this on the Ironic side as well for some standalone cases.
17:55:40 cardoe Really wanting to advocate for collaboration here between the projects and to fulfill operator need.
17:55:47 cardoe We're essentially blocked on reviews.
18:06:24 ishanwar[m] Hey
18:06:24 ishanwar[m] sean-k-mooney (@_oftc_sean-k-mooney:matrix.org)
18:06:24 ishanwar[m] can you have a look for this https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/945204
18:07:20 sean-k-mooney cardoe: is that the vnc console one
18:07:25 sean-k-mooney to provide a graphical console
18:07:52 cardoe No. That's trunk port info in metadata
18:07:54 sean-k-mooney cardoe: oh its not
18:08:12 sean-k-mooney cardoe: so that problemantic
18:08:42 sean-k-mooney cardoe: the problem is tha twhen ironci is used vai nova it relaly should not be touchign the neutorn prots at all
18:09:11 sean-k-mooney cardoe: which means that to supprot port group and trunkign it shoudl be modeled in neutron
18:09:15 sean-k-mooney whic hits not today
18:10:12 cardoe I don't disagree.
18:10:24 cardoe One of the many specs on my queue to write.
18:11:29 sean-k-mooney cardoe: without deep diving into the spec we probably can supprot addign the subport info into the metadtata api or config drive
18:11:37 sean-k-mooney for any virt dirver
18:11:40 sean-k-mooney even ironic
18:11:58 sean-k-mooney but only if the trunk port is pass by uuid as part of the boot request
18:12:23 sean-k-mooney if ironic makes changes to the prots out of band however
18:12:45 sean-k-mooney i.e. maping that 1 neutorn trunk port to to a port group
18:12:57 sean-k-mooney your kind of out of luck
18:13:50 sean-k-mooney so like you could not really combin doign bondign via port groups and this
18:14:54 JayF Yeah, that's been the root pain the whole time. To model this all in network metadata on the nova side requires it to be modeled all the way through, which I think has to start with neutron not with nova
18:15:14 sean-k-mooney cardoe: or rather if you did try and combind them nova can only provide the info it had ebfore we call ironci to provision in the config drive
18:15:50 sean-k-mooney JayF:right we can add any info that is aviabel from neutron at the point we generate the config drive
18:16:07 sean-k-mooney but after that point either ironic need to update it itsself
18:16:16 sean-k-mooney or we would need a way to trigger a refresh
18:16:24 JayF (patches are close to merge that have ironic regen it)
18:16:54 sean-k-mooney JayF: is that to adresss the bonding bug mnaser reported
18:17:08 JayF I think we addressed that in a backportable way
18:17:26 cardoe which is the bug mnaser reported?
18:18:00 JayF https://launchpad.net/bugs/2106073
18:18:06 sean-k-mooney https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic/+bug/2106073
18:18:13 sean-k-mooney :)_
18:18:33 sean-k-mooney cardoe: its a similar problam statement
18:19:04 sean-k-mooney the config drive is needed to be abel to bootstrap the networkign to be able to hit the metadta when you are usign static ips or bonds
18:19:37 sean-k-mooney specificly any bond that require both the swtich and host to be configured in a given bonding mode for traffic to flow
18:20:50 sean-k-mooney cardoe: your usecase is related but seperate and i think valid
18:21:10 sean-k-mooney cardoe: ironic could enrich the metadat with the turnk port info
18:21:18 sean-k-mooney btu nova can do that too
18:21:33 sean-k-mooney and nova could do it for libvirt or vmware in a generic way
18:34:24 cardoe I would love if neutron modeled this all. Much like I’m trying to get L2 VNI in there.
18:35:06 sean-k-mooney cardoe: when we dicussed trunkports intially we also disucssed bond ports
18:35:23 cardoe Which is something already patched in nova
18:35:28 sean-k-mooney the latter just didnt get doen btu i dont see why you cant have the same bond port sub port relationship
18:36:06 sean-k-mooney port groups in ironci are a littel differnt however then just a bond or turnk port
18:36:10 cardoe Trunk boards are already modeled inside of neutron
18:36:16 cardoe Ports
18:36:41 cardoe It’s nova that doesn’t handle it
18:37:13 cardoe So it’s not really related to that bug.
18:41:40 sean-k-mooney cardoe: so i did a very quick review and asked a few questions but +1 for the over all idea
18:43:23 sean-k-mooney cardoe: im not sure if we currently test turnkprots in the nova ci jobs (maybe the ovs hybrid plug one?) but i know the neutron do and have a tempest plugin to do some more advanced testing with it
18:43:58 sean-k-mooney so whiel im not sure if the trunk connectivty test would be accepted in core tempest it definlly could be done in one of neutron tempest plugins
18:49:44 sean-k-mooney melwitt: speaking of specs are you plannign to work on the vtpm spec and implemetion this cycle. i think that was the plan aroudn the ptg but just touching base to make sure that has not changed?
18:50:31 melwitt argh
18:50:45 melwitt sean-k-mooney: yes I am -- still the plan. I have re-proposed the spec and noted the changes from the last approval in the commit message
18:51:15 sean-k-mooney cool. i will proably try and put aside some time to look at the open spec next week
18:51:48 melwitt sure, thanks
18:56:03 melwitt seen this a few times now, nova-ceph-multistore failures due to "nova.exception.ImageDeleteConflict: Conflict deleting image. Reason: HTTP 409 Conflict: Image a34561ed-6ef7-457c-8845-677f83af10de could not be deleted because it is in use: The image cannot be deleted because it is in use through the backend store outside of Glance.."
18:56:54 sean-k-mooney ya
18:56:57 sean-k-mooney i noticed that too
18:57:22 melwitt I wonder if anything's changed or why it's happening often recently. I haven't spent time looking into it yet
19:10:55 cardoe sean-k-mooney: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/941227 is the implementation. Linked you’ll find the addition of tests and tempest patches as well to test it all.
19:32:13 sean-k-mooney cardoe: can you put the implemation and the spec on a gerrit topic called bp/<sepc/blueprint name>
19:33:18 sean-k-mooney convetionally the topic shoudl eb "bp/expose-vlan-trunking" in thei case but "spec/expose-vlan-trunking" is also perfectly fine
19:33:28 cardoe Will do.
19:33:59 sean-k-mooney cardoe: we try to keep teh filename/topic/spec link all the same.
19:36:52 sean-k-mooney cardoe: im goint to call it a day now but did you sway there are also existing tempest tests
19:37:37 sean-k-mooney cardoe: ah tehy were abandoned https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron-tempest-plugin/+/941355
19:55:27 cardoe sorry was replying from mobile. I'll resurrect things.
#openstack-nova - 2025-05-16
04:49:26 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: live migration: Avoid volume rollback mismatches https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/946600
06:48:03 ishanwar[m] dansmith: sean-k-mooney melwitt Can you please review
06:48:03 ishanwar[m] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/945204 ?

Earlier   Later