| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2025-08-19 | |||
| 20:47:56 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: tests: Stop "testing" against Identity v2 API https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/952984 | |
| 20:48:08 | sean-k-mooney | tirvially so but it woudl be the first tiem to do that with the embeded falvor that i am aware of | |
| 20:51:45 | melwitt | yeah.. I need a moment to regain my bearings 😝 I have spent so much time working on this and implementing the spec. I need some time to re-adjust my mind to this new thing | |
| 20:55:14 | sean-k-mooney | ya i dont have ennoguh sapre brain power to load context and think about this with any depth tonight to say anythign more then "Maybe?" | |
| 20:56:17 | melwitt | heh | |
| 20:56:31 | sean-k-mooney | i vaguly got that dan want to avoid updating the request spec on all move operations which i agree should not be required but i dont knwo why the serisse currenlty is so i cant really comment | |
| 20:57:24 | melwitt | it's because the original design involves setting a default inside sysmeta down in the libvirt driver. so that has to make it to the request spec somehow in order to be honored during scheduling | |
| 20:58:04 | sean-k-mooney | as in fakign that it was selected in the image medata data | |
| 20:58:04 | melwitt | this issue goes away if we require image/flavor for the policy, which is why that's being talked about above | |
| 20:58:28 | sean-k-mooney | so your saying we need to sync the image metadata form teh cell db to the request spec | |
| 20:58:35 | sean-k-mooney | so that move ops fine the right host | |
| 20:58:53 | melwitt | yes pretty much. the entire design in the spec is to put a image_hw_tpm_secret_security into the instance sysmeta regardless of whether it came from an image or not | |
| 20:59:08 | sean-k-mooney | ghat that sound valid and unfortunet because the comptue shoudl nbot need to touch the api db | |
| 20:59:16 | sean-k-mooney | but how do we handel this today? | |
| 20:59:27 | sean-k-mooney | we set a buch fo thing liek that already | |
| 21:00:07 | melwitt | you mean like for AZs? that got brought up in the gerrit review | |
| 21:00:28 | sean-k-mooney | like we set the request for a config drive or the machine tyep when the isntace lands on a comptue node | |
| 21:00:45 | sean-k-mooney | and recored them in instance_system_metadta during spawn | |
| 21:02:19 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L7190-L7200 | |
| 21:03:22 | sean-k-mooney | we do it in other palcees too that just the first palce i found | |
| 21:03:46 | melwitt | yeah that's very similar thing. but I don't find that ever makes it to the request spec | |
| 21:04:10 | sean-k-mooney | there are a bunch of debug lgos when we boot a vm where we recored specific values to make sure they dont change over the lifetime of the vm | |
| 21:04:20 | melwitt | not sure if any of those cases are things that are required for scheduling | |
| 21:06:13 | sean-k-mooney | ya nor am i | |
| 21:10:27 | sean-k-mooney | oh i set config_drive on the instance object not the image meta github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/manager.py#L2255-L2268 https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/manager.py#L2255-L2268 | |
| 21:10:37 | sean-k-mooney | and we do not schduler on that either | |
| 21:19:44 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: https://paste.opendev.org/show/bGufCv4fBSCZwAP3m6qT/ thos are the log message i ment | |
| 21:20:37 | sean-k-mooney | which is https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/manager.py#L2255-L2268 | |
| 21:20:53 | sean-k-mooney | sorry wrong link | |
| 21:21:06 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/d5cfdfd16d7573a83b05dd6c0656b7610e77c4c4/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L993-L1043 | |
| 21:21:52 | sean-k-mooney | we can scheduler on 'hw_video_model', 'hw_vif_model' | |
| 21:22:10 | sean-k-mooney | via a placement prefileter | |
| 21:22:23 | sean-k-mooney | but perhaps that only works fi you ahve it set on the iamge properly | |
| 21:22:54 | melwitt | hm yeah maybe | |
| 21:23:10 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/manager.py#L2255-L2268 | |
| 21:23:32 | sean-k-mooney | wehn i wrote that i was not thinkign fo this other way of populating it | |
| 21:23:35 | sean-k-mooney | ... | |
| 21:23:46 | sean-k-mooney | way is that link stuck in my copy past buffer | |
| 21:23:57 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/d5cfdfd16d7573a83b05dd6c0656b7610e77c4c4/nova/scheduler/request_filter.py#L199 | |
| 21:24:10 | melwitt | it really wants you to talk about that link I guess | |
| 21:24:12 | sean-k-mooney | oh its becasue the url was not updating in my firefox | |
| 21:24:36 | sean-k-mooney | you know the way if you edit the url but then navigate it does not updstea properly i think that is what happend | |
| 21:25:35 | melwitt | yeah that request filter is assuming the image properties are already in the request spec | |
| 21:25:41 | sean-k-mooney | so lee added this registration logic so that we could freely change the defautls without affectin new instnaces | |
| 21:26:02 | sean-k-mooney | but it was never inteded for scheduleing really | |
| 21:26:12 | sean-k-mooney | but i guess that was an oversight in the orignal feature | |
| 21:26:48 | sean-k-mooney | we never provide a way to sync the request spec with those if it was ever needed | |
| 21:27:23 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: this is were your nova audit proroal woudl have been useful | |
| 21:27:40 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. to do a perodic sync of this info form the cell db to the api db | |
| 21:29:15 | melwitt | nova-janitor | |
| 21:31:50 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Replace keystoneclient with openstacksdk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/952986 | |
| 21:37:47 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2024.1: restrict swap volume to cinder https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/957764 | |
| 23:54:06 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2025.1: Ignore metadata tags in pci/stats _find_pool logic https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/945096 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2025-08-20 | |||
| 05:53:44 | opendevreview | Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova master: Add service role in Nova policy https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/957578 | |
| 06:46:54 | opendevreview | Max proposed openstack/nova master: fix: leftover volume_attachment on instance delete https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934984 | |
| 06:52:32 | opendevreview | Max proposed openstack/nova master: fix: leftover volume_attachment on instance delete https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934984 | |
| 11:19:01 | priteau | Hello. I am looking for reviewers for the backports fixing https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2098496. | |
| 11:19:19 | priteau | 2024.2 patches are ready to approve now: | |
| 11:19:21 | priteau | - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/945098 | |
| 11:19:24 | priteau | - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/945099 | |
| 15:28:29 | jssfr | does openstack have a workflow for booting a VM based off a unified kernel image (i.e. kernel + initramfs)? | |
| 15:42:43 | pas-ha[m] | jssfr: I'd think you still can, but it is deprecated since 2024.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/926144 | |
| 15:43:51 | jssfr | lovely | |
| 15:44:13 | jssfr | thanks! | |
| #openstack-nova - 2025-08-21 | |||
| 08:56:59 | zigo | sean-k-mooney: Is Zed affected by OSSN-0094 ? That's in Debian Bookworm (ie: oldstable), which is why I wonder. So far, I did the work for caracal, dalmatian and epoxy, as there was patches available. | |
| 08:58:36 | zigo | It'd be nice ot have patches for zed, antelope and bobcat btw. | |
| 11:10:01 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: well those are unmaintended so as a rule the core team do not patch any bugs on them but we have antelop downstream and i think it was a clean cherry pick | |
| 11:11:12 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: but yes this has basicly been a thing forever. gibi did some monumental heavy liftign to backprot to wallabyt and train inertnally with a lot fo conflict in the tests. | |
| 11:11:24 | sean-k-mooney | but you might be able to just apply it back to zed | |
| 11:12:25 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: the risk profile fo this is relitivly low which is why we didn not push for a CVE ro similar | |
| 11:13:00 | sean-k-mooney | but i woudl encurage packages to patch it where ever they deem resonable | |
| 11:19:23 | zigo | If it's clean apply for Zed to Bobcat, then I'll attempt it. | |
| 11:21:58 | zigo | It doesn't apply on antelope, though it's only one hunk. | |
| 11:23:05 | sean-k-mooney | i suspect if that is resovled for antelope it would not need more change in zed. downstream we only have branches for the release we productise | |
| 11:23:23 | sean-k-mooney | so we jumped form 2023.1 to antelope then to wallaby then to train | |
| 11:23:44 | sean-k-mooney | and witht he other backprot we have those patches are not alwasy useful upstrem | |
| 11:23:56 | sean-k-mooney | since they generally wont apply clenaly | |
| 11:25:38 | sean-k-mooney | our "antelope" branch as bits of epoxy in it alsthoru we really try not to do feature backport mroe then one-two upstream releases as it gets harder as time goes by to backprot bug fixes if we diverge too much | |
| 11:26:58 | zigo | Looks ok, I could backport to Zed and Antelope for at least Nova. | |
| 11:27:03 | zigo | Will do Watcher next. | |
| 11:27:36 | sean-k-mooney | watcher i think will be simpler because it did not have much code developement for quite a while | |
| 11:28:23 | zigo | Thanks for all. :P | |
| 11:29:32 | sean-k-mooney | by the way if you want to propose those to the unmainted branches you can but i have no +2 right there but elodilles may be interested in them | |
| 11:40:30 | zigo | I confirm it's super easy to backport! :) | |
| 11:40:32 | elodilles | zigo: please cherry pick the backport to unmaintained/2023.1 and zed branches and add me as reviewer and i'll review them | |
| 11:40:46 | elodilles | s/backport/bugfix | |
| 12:03:25 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: thanks, i'm interested, indeed :) | |
| 12:33:04 | tkajinam | Could someone from the core review this remaining python 3.9 removal patch ? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/953367 | |
| 12:33:18 | tkajinam | and also this tiny one to get rid of a deprecation warning https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/953759 | |
| 12:34:33 | tkajinam | I'd also appreciate any feedback about sev-es series https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bp/amd-sev-es-libvirt-support%22 ! | |
| 12:40:47 | sean-k-mooney | tkajinam: done ill look at sev later if i have time or monday | |
| 12:56:58 | tkajinam | sean-k-mooney, thanks ! | |
| 13:13:00 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Fix validators for hw:cpu_max_* extra specs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/957732 | |
| 13:49:02 | zigo | elodilles: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/958200 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/958202 | |
| 13:49:14 | zigo | Will you also review backports for Watcher? | |
| 14:22:10 | elodilles | zigo: thanks! sure, i can do review watcher backports as well | |
| 14:22:44 | zigo | Ok, working on it then. | |
| 14:29:54 | zigo | elodilles: I did this one for Antelope: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/958207 though there's no unmaintained/zed branch, how can I do it then? | |
| 14:46:16 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/placement master: sqlalchemy: Use built-in declarative https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/953759 | |
| 14:54:59 | elodilles | zigo: thanks for the nova backports, i've found some nits in it, otherwise looks good! see my comments! | |