| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2025-08-26 | |||
| 11:39:17 | sean-k-mooney | priteau: elodilles i have +2w'd the 2024.2 version and +2'd the 2024.1 version of those so once the former merges elod can upgrade there +1 on the latter and merge them | |
| 11:42:04 | elodilles | ACK, i'll take an eye on it | |
| 11:47:20 | sean-k-mooney | general quetion for folks. how woudl people feel about have ing "meta traits" taht are reported if an only iff all the cpu feature flags for x86-64 version profile are met | |
| 11:47:22 | sean-k-mooney | https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=X86-64§ion=20#Microarchitecture_levels | |
| 11:48:20 | sean-k-mooney | basiclly the libvirt driver would addtionally report x86-64-v2 if all of the cpu feature flags requried for that were actully supported | |
| 11:48:31 | sean-k-mooney | same for v3 and v4 | |
| 11:49:13 | sean-k-mooney | that would mean if you had a rhel 10 iamge for example that can only run on v3 you coudl do a singel required trait x86-64-v3 | |
| 11:49:40 | sean-k-mooney | instead of listing all of the v3 ones indeviually | |
| 11:51:31 | sean-k-mooney | you could go one step futher and supprot defining meta traits in placement directly so you would not need to report them but coudl request them and it do the translation internally | |
| 11:52:00 | sean-k-mooney | that could be very useful eventually but i am not sure i want to go that far right now | |
| 11:53:48 | sean-k-mooney | how that woudl work would be creatign a new api to define a meta traits as a union of other triaits (possible even a set of requried/forbiden triat instead of a plain union of required) and placement woudl just pre process the allocation candiate string and replace any meta taits with the expanded set | |
| 11:54:37 | sean-k-mooney | that woudl allow admins to defien there own but im not sure we need that level of flexablity | |
| 12:12:41 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/2024.2: Reproduce bug/2098496 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/945098 | |
| 12:55:09 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Separate volume, snapshot and volume attachments https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952347 | |
| 12:55:10 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: tests: Use valid UUIDs for cinder resources https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952935 | |
| 12:55:10 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Only apply "soft" additionalProperties validation to requests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952936 | |
| 13:00:42 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: Those functional tests are fixed now, if you're game to re-apply your +2/+W? ^ | |
| 13:02:16 | sean-k-mooney | done ill let gmaan hit https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952347/9 but the next 2-3? have +2w | |
| 13:02:26 | opendevreview | Florian proposed openstack/nova master: Add check for PCIe devices attach limit for volume and ports https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/955584 | |
| 13:03:02 | sean-k-mooney | as we dicussed offline once that batch is in we can see if you need to rebase the rest or if they will just apply | |
| 13:57:56 | opendevreview | Florian proposed openstack/nova master: Add check for PCIe devices attach limit for volume and ports https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/955584 | |
| 14:12:57 | opendevreview | Florian proposed openstack/nova master: Add check for PCIe devices attach limit for volume and ports https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/955584 | |
| 14:30:49 | bauzas | dansmith: can you just +2/+W that very old Flamingo patch that modifies the support envelope for our non-SLURP release ? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944018 | |
| 14:30:56 | bauzas | this is too way overdue | |
| 14:32:32 | dansmith | bauzas: I thought we were sticking with two releases always to make sure we always support skip-level? | |
| 14:33:07 | bauzas | nope, we always set the minimum object version to N-1 if we are on a non-SLURP as we don't support skip-level for ops | |
| 14:33:21 | dansmith | ...but we run grenate-skip-level-always | |
| 14:33:35 | dansmith | I'm not sure why that didn't fail though (logs are gone) | |
| 14:33:37 | bauzas | indeed, but that's again not our support envelope | |
| 14:33:49 | bauzas | skip-level changes the option and bypasses that value then | |
| 14:33:58 | dansmith | does it? | |
| 14:34:00 | bauzas | (IIRC) | |
| 14:34:19 | bauzas | yeah, IIRC we have a flag that says "I gonna skip the min version" | |
| 14:34:26 | bauzas | for something we called FFU way long before | |
| 14:34:43 | bauzas | the beast is gone but the flag remains | |
| 14:34:44 | dansmith | if so I don't know where that is | |
| 14:35:31 | bauzas | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/913890 was the one we merged for Dalmatian | |
| 14:36:22 | bauzas | NOVA_ENABLE_UPGRADE_WORKAROUND is the tempest flag if I'm not mistaken | |
| 14:36:22 | dansmith | yeah, I see, but .. I'm not sure that's right | |
| 14:38:07 | bauzas | https://opendev.org/openstack/grenade/src/branch/master/projects/60_nova/upgrade.sh#L77 | |
| 14:38:20 | dansmith | I'm not sure skip-level-always actually does a multinode and leaves a node behind.. from the code I don't see how this would not break a skip level | |
| 14:38:22 | bauzas | that's the thing we did from Antelope and older | |
| 14:38:41 | bauzas | skip-level was turning the object version check off | |
| 14:39:02 | bauzas | but we always said that our support envelope was N-1 | |
| 14:39:05 | bauzas | for non-SLURP | |
| 14:39:16 | dansmith | okay, I see yeah | |
| 14:39:17 | bauzas | I even wrote that big fat comment in the object | |
| 14:40:28 | bauzas | some day around early october after we branch RC1, we would keep the value of that object | |
| 14:40:42 | bauzas | as we would continue to support Epoxy | |
| 14:40:50 | dansmith | yes there's a big comment, but it doesn't cover the skip-level detail | |
| 14:40:53 | bauzas | even if master is Gazpatcho-based | |
| 14:41:25 | dansmith | while I was grepping through the tree, my shell was reminding me that I have run some of the same greps in the last year, so clearly I was doing the same thing last time ;) | |
| 14:41:26 | bauzas | I can add some extra paragraph that would mention that that value is not read by skip-level | |
| 14:41:54 | bauzas | as skip-level turns on [workarounds]/disable_compute_service_check_for_ffu | |
| 14:42:19 | bauzas | lemme then amend my patch and add that comment to prevent another brain cycle next time :) | |
| 14:43:01 | dansmith | yeah just mentioning the config option might be enough | |
| 14:52:49 | opendevreview | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: Update min support for Flamingo https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/944018 | |
| 14:53:52 | bauzas | dansmith: can you just reapply your +W ? | |
| 14:54:19 | dansmith | done | |
| 14:55:20 | bauzas | thanks | |
| 15:00:37 | dansmith | gibi: I don't have anything proposed but unmerged for precache | |
| 15:00:44 | gibi | ack | |
| 15:00:57 | gibi | I will test a bit manually the eventlet removal change then | |
| 15:01:01 | dansmith | _probably_ because we can't externally validate it, we could only make sure it didn't fail the call or something | |
| 15:01:01 | sean-k-mooney | i was talking to gmann about this at one point | |
| 15:01:18 | gibi | dansmith: ahh good point. Maybe whitebox then... | |
| 15:01:20 | sean-k-mooney | about maybe adding a whitebox test to ssh in and assert the base image is created after caching | |
| 15:01:27 | dansmith | yeah | |
| 15:01:32 | sean-k-mooney | i dont know if they wrote that test yest hwoever but let me look | |
| 15:02:47 | gibi | I don't see anything in whitebox either | |
| 15:03:05 | sean-k-mooney | no i don tthink they started on it | |
| 15:03:28 | sean-k-mooney | we were chating about it in the context of dicussiong what ci coverage we had in general when they joined the team | |
| 15:03:30 | gibi | OK. manual testing then... I anyhow wanted to test two different caching running in paralle | |
| 15:04:08 | dansmith | that might be hard unless you have a large image or artificially slow it down | |
| 15:04:17 | sean-k-mooney | it would be nice to add a test for it to whitebox eventually | |
| 15:04:41 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I agree | |
| 15:04:53 | gibi | dansmith: yepp I will do one or the other :) | |
| 15:05:32 | sean-k-mooney | so gmaan recently added a test for booting form an iso to validate that https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/whitebox-tempest-plugin/+/955950/4/whitebox_tempest_plugin/api/compute/test_iso_image.py | |
| 15:05:58 | sean-k-mooney | so we already have a custom image file in ci we could use | |
| 15:06:19 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. we can create a new imag e in the test in clance using the iso | |
| 15:06:37 | sean-k-mooney | and the pre cache that to an aggreate | |
| 15:10:19 | gibi | cool | |
| 15:11:32 | gmaan | gibi: sean-k-mooney this is where I added Core-14.0.iso image in job and devstack download it and tempest plugin can play with that image from file locattion - https://github.com/openstack/whitebox-tempest-plugin/blob/master/.zuul.yaml#L72C206-L72C219 | |
| 15:13:33 | gibi | thanks | |
| 15:14:29 | sean-k-mooney | we could also have used any of the sandard images like cirros but since whitebox now expect an iso at least to run that test we might as well use it esplciy since we are intenallysuing tiny core which as the name implies is small | |
| 15:15:06 | sean-k-mooney | i want to revive the idea of running a subset of whitebox in nova's check jobs at somepoint by the way | |
| 15:15:08 | gmaan | yeah, that is not too large but we can add larger image here | |
| 15:15:34 | sean-k-mooney | we can skip all the ahrdware specfic stuff but obvioulsy but this and the iso but check woudl be nice to have | |
| 15:15:50 | gmaan | only tricky part of ssh into server booted from iso image. But i do not think pre-cache image test need that | |
| 15:16:18 | sean-k-mooney | we are also not doing that in whitebox today for the iso case | |
| 15:16:26 | gmaan | sean-k-mooney: good idea, I can add that or maybe we can run a separate peroidic job as full whitebox plugin | |
| 15:16:52 | gmaan | I mean running iso image test in nova | |
| 15:17:15 | sean-k-mooney | i spoke to melwitt breifly about changing nova-ovs-hybird plug in to nova-alt-config adn having it test more things | |
| 15:17:34 | sean-k-mooney | so rather then adding a new job or continuing to extend nova-next i woudl put it in that job | |
| 15:18:09 | sean-k-mooney | we can chat about that in more detail after FF ro at teh ptg whenever we have tiem to plan that out | |
| 15:18:31 | sean-k-mooney | but i was chatting to her about enableing nova on nfs and cinder nfs in that job | |
| 15:18:39 | sean-k-mooney | so we have coverage of both goign forward | |
| 15:19:26 | sean-k-mooney | so nova-alt-config woud test spice, ml2/ovs, nfs and whitebox things | |
| 15:19:43 | sean-k-mooney | on debian 13 | |
| 15:20:01 | sean-k-mooney | so it will also test python 3.13 | |