Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2025-12-03
11:35:58 sean-k-mooney DominikDanelski[m]: so you shoudl rebase on top of https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969251
11:38:50 sean-k-mooney i dont have time to do a detailed review but the content looks reasonable at first glance. the only think i wasould imedially say could be imporved is expelcity defining the flavor to be use dith the server. your currently relying impleictly on the behavior fo self._build_server(networks='none') so without diging inot the defautl flavor that that is usign tis not apprent why
11:38:52 sean-k-mooney it woudl violate quota
11:52:12 opendevreview Will Szumski proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Try and reproduce nova scheduler race https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969380
12:06:57 MaxLamprecht[m] Hey, I have https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934984(+regression test), which has already +2 by sean-mooney. Anyone available for more review/merge?
12:08:02 MaxLamprecht[m] * have https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934984 (+regression test),
12:08:47 MaxLamprecht[m] Additionally I have a really small MR that adds missing db indices for better db performance. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/958556
13:24:08 opendevreview Dominik proposed openstack/nova master: Regression test for Placement allocations remaining during failed schedule (bug #2132020) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969251
13:40:12 opendevreview sean mooney proposed openstack/nova-specs master: add spec for resouce notifications https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/967712
15:25:36 opendevreview Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add backlog spec for Graceful shutodwn of nova services https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/967469
15:28:09 gmaan gibi: sean-k-mooney dansmith ^^ updated it, no change in proposal just fixed the sean-k-mooney comments on improving the paragraphs.
15:29:41 gmaan gibi: i saw you commented on the spec1 proposal for this cycle, I think we should fix those in backlog spec? so that spec1 proposal in cycle and backlog spec can match https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/969299/3
15:30:47 gmaan my idea was merge the backlog spec after fixing all things we want and then propose spec1 and spec2 per cycle with no change in proposal
15:42:24 ratailor gmaan, could you please review tempest test as suggested in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/929780/comments/342e3188_90765518 and please provide your suggestion if any improvement is required.
15:42:38 ratailor https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/953331
16:22:57 gmaan gibi: sean-k-mooney ignore my last comment about spec1 proposal , I am checking the comemnt and will propose the updated version
16:23:18 sean-k-mooney ack
16:36:12 gmaan ratailor: ack, will check
16:48:09 opendevreview Lajos Katona proposed openstack/nova master: blueprint: iothreads-for-instances https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/939254
16:50:40 opendevreview Lajos Katona proposed openstack/nova master: blueprint: iothreads-for-instances https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/939254
17:12:46 opendevreview Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Collect result of _live_migration_operation https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969501
17:12:50 dansmith gibi: ^
17:16:15 opendevreview Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Fix missing guest.migrate(parallel=) mock arg https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969503
17:16:45 dansmith and this ^ should fix the actual failure. We'll need to swap the order of those before merge of course, but in this sequence you can see the problem
17:26:15 dansmith I'll create a bug for this after my current call, btw
17:43:08 gibi dansmith: looking
17:49:59 gibi this is the eventlet change in that codepath https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948072/17/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py
17:50:52 gibi I'm wondering how the eventlet version raised the exception if if it is not waited for the spawned greenlet to finish
17:51:57 gibi I'm pretty fried already so I probably not seeing someting obvious here
17:56:56 dansmith I'm still on another call, but maybe a CastAsCall difference? perhaps that's the change here and not something that would be actually different at runtime? but also, it seems bad for us to not capture such an error at runtime
17:57:04 dansmith so perhaps the actual miss has been longer than eventlet removal
17:57:22 dansmith but it's definitely different with the new future stuff, and hides errors we were catching before (as demonstrated)
17:58:24 gibi yeah there is spawn synchronous fixture (like CastAsCall for RPC) so that can be involved
17:58:33 dansmith er, right
17:58:43 gibi hm that gave me a hunch
18:00:58 gibi there was a test fixture for this sync spanw for testing and it was actually broken (or I assumed at that time that it was broken) and I changed the behavior of it (thought fixing it) during the eventlet removal. This can be a fallout of that...
18:01:04 gibi now I just need to find it
18:02:44 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Spec for asynchronous volume-attach API https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/958900
18:05:57 gibi dansmith: I think this is the old code that made it work https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/948072/17/nova/tests/fixtures/nova.py#b1322
18:06:23 gibi nope,ignore me
18:06:40 gibi link and add_done_callback is behaving the same
18:11:44 gibi OK I'm lost. I will try tomorrow with fresh minds
18:12:09 dansmith no problem, at least we know the problem now
18:21:27 opendevreview Will Szumski proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Adds regression test for bug LP#2132984 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969380
19:03:22 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Add backlog spec for Graceful shutodwn of nova services https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/967469
22:10:01 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: WIP Make QEMU_IMG_LIMITS process limits configurable https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969538
22:53:47 opendevreview Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Propose Spec 1 of Graceful shutodwn for 2026.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/969299
23:47:10 JayF Unsure who all has core on nova stable; but it'd be really nice to get this landed: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/968208 (and I'll take it back to next release when it is)
23:54:34 opendevreview Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add spec3 in graceful shutdown backlog spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/969543
#openstack-nova - 2025-12-04
00:10:23 gmaan sean-k-mooney: gibi updated the graceful shurdown spec, please check - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/969299
00:34:39 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: WIP Make QEMU_IMG_LIMITS process limits configurable https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969538
00:44:10 sean-k-mooney gmaan: ack ill take a look in my morning
01:04:43 opendevreview sean mooney proposed openstack/nova-specs master: add spec for resource tracker notifications https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/967712
02:17:15 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova stable/2025.2: [ironic] Ensure unprovision happens for new states https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/968208
02:36:20 opendevreview Jay Faulkner proposed openstack/nova stable/2025.1: [ironic] Ensure unprovision happens for new states https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969547
02:50:23 opendevreview zhou zhong proposed openstack/nova master: Create ephemeral and private secret when attaching encryptor https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969019
07:00:32 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: ensure correct cleanup of multi-attach volumes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/916322
07:59:48 ratailor gibi, sean-k-mooney bauzas could you please check this schema validation failure https://e88fada250d77d396ef5-a605dbf95134d478b50bec2dfa092555.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/openstack/146bb31174804bc5bebdba2b537c97db/testr_results.html related to https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bp/show-instance-action-finish-time%22
08:00:33 bauzas but I want to give a swing on the left specs I didn't read yet
08:00:48 ratailor In my local devstack env, I could get the instance action finish_time for create and attach_volume actions here https://paste.openstack.org/show/bWzmPfwfOZ9FQpfCpVPm/
08:01:17 ratailor bauzas, ack.
08:01:31 ratailor gmaan, ^^
08:06:19 bauzas ratailor: I'm not really a tempest expert about schema validations
08:06:50 bauzas I saw the patch that got -1 review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/953331 but honestly I don't know why
08:07:15 ratailor bauzas, ack. I think stephenfin can help here. ^^
08:07:23 bauzas I see you're depending on the nova patches
08:07:52 bauzas so everything looks correct to me at a first glance
08:08:02 ratailor bauzas, could you please review nova-spec and implementation and suggest if anything is missing.
08:08:35 bauzas as I said, I'll do another round of open specs today
08:09:02 gibi Details: HTTP response body is invalid (Additional properties are not allowed ('finish_time' was unexpected)
08:09:18 gibi so I assume your nova patch added a new field to the response
08:09:22 gibi that was not there before
08:09:26 ratailor gibi, yes
08:09:43 gibi and the tempest schema wasn't updated to accept that field in the new microvresion
08:21:24 ratailor gibi, this is what I have done to update tempest schema
08:21:26 ratailor https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/953331/7/tempest/lib/api_schema/response/compute/v2_101/servers.py
09:00:23 jkulik ratailor: looks like you're overwriting your changes to show_instance_action in line 19 again in line 40
09:13:47 ratailor jkulik, nice catch, thanks!
09:36:53 zigo Hi there!
09:36:53 zigo Looks like I have 2 unit tests failing in Nova's autopkgtest because our ppc64el servers are too fast, no ?
09:36:53 zigo https://ci.debian.net/packages/n/nova/testing/ppc64el/66782181/
09:39:44 zigo gibi: ^ Your thoughts?
09:40:16 zigo Should we add a sleep() in these unit tests?
10:57:48 opendevreview Thomas Goirand proposed openstack/nova master: Fix race condition in DB updates https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969745
11:12:47 opendevreview Dominik proposed openstack/nova master: Regression test for Placement allocations remaining during failed schedule (bug #2132020) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969251
11:19:23 opendevreview Dominik proposed openstack/nova master: Regression test for Placement allocations remaining during failed schedule https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969251
11:39:54 sean-k-mooney zigo: we try not ot add sleeps in gerneal so ideally no
11:40:38 sean-k-mooney zigo: we normally contol time in these test
11:41:24 sean-k-mooney so it looks like the test has a race condtion. if we add a sleep it woudl be somethign liks sleep(0.001)
11:42:09 sean-k-mooney zigo: i think gibi fixed a few cases likt this before when they started workign on the eventlet removal
12:02:34 stephenfin ratailor: bauzas: you need to define a new schema for tempest before the nova patch can merge. gmaan is a better person again to ask https://github.com/openstack/tempest/tree/8e2e854051b247ce914982ab0c3c0ed5e2f01b09/tempest/lib/api_schema/response/compute
12:02:58 stephenfin hopefully the duplication can be removed once the final patches merge against nova (hint hint)
12:03:07 stephenfin *final OpenAPI patches
12:06:12 opendevreview Thomas Goirand proposed openstack/nova master: Fix race condition in DB updates https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/969745
12:12:06 ratailor stephenfin, ack.
12:19:00 zigo sean-k-mooney: You're wrong, IMO.
12:19:18 zigo sean-k-mooney: The issue is getting 2 timestamps in less than 1 second.
12:19:33 zigo Then they are equal, and later on, the test checks if they are NOT equal.
12:23:16 sean-k-mooney zigo: what im saying is we normlaly try to decouple the unit test entirly form teh infra
12:23:52 sean-k-mooney for example by mockign time.now() so that each call woudl increment by 1 second or some other way

Earlier   Later