| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2026-03-09 | |||
| 16:29:50 | Uggla | yep it is what we mentionned last week. We will try to merge lajoskatona sdk client stuff earmy next cycle. | |
| 16:30:22 | dansmith | cool | |
| 16:30:57 | Uggla | #topic Open discussion | |
| 16:31:07 | Uggla | We have a topic from melwitt | |
| 16:32:13 | melwitt | hi, yes, wanted to discuss about the possibility of an exception for vtpm live migration remaining patches | |
| 16:32:51 | melwitt | the 'host' security mode for live migration has merged but the 'deployment' mode is still outstanding | |
| 16:33:34 | melwitt | the 'deployment' mode is the one where the nova service user owns the barbican secrets. | |
| 16:33:37 | dansmith | I haven't reviewed above what we've merged... well, except for the fixup patch | |
| 16:33:57 | bauzas | it will be difficult to review it for 3 days left given the RC1 deadline | |
| 16:34:13 | dansmith | looks like the last review from anyone on that patch was almost two years ago (Aug 2024) | |
| 16:35:04 | dansmith | yeah, I'm not sure how we could even consider this an FFE candidate given it's not like "reviewed but just didn't make the deadline"... | |
| 16:35:40 | dansmith | and as sean-k-mooney just said above, candidates for things right now should really be "regression introduced this cycle" | |
| 16:35:59 | sean-k-mooney | im a littel sad the deployment mode was not done first | |
| 16:36:10 | sean-k-mooney | but ya i think it woudl be better to finish it early next cycle | |
| 16:36:40 | dansmith | really? i think host is the most useful mode | |
| 16:36:53 | sean-k-mooney | deployment requried the least code chage | |
| 16:37:01 | dansmith | I guess we don't know until ops start deciding but I guess I think host is what most of them will want | |
| 16:37:05 | sean-k-mooney | that why i asked for it to be first since it did nto need to object change | |
| 16:37:19 | sean-k-mooney | but i didnt object to the current order | |
| 16:37:28 | sean-k-mooney | just suggested the other one was less invaisve | |
| 16:37:42 | dansmith | *shrug* I was more focused on getting host in because I _suspect_ it's the thing people will want | |
| 16:37:51 | dansmith | but yeah I get your point | |
| 16:38:37 | melwitt | yeah, the less change makes sense as a subset of that is what would be needed for 'user' mode live migration as well | |
| 16:38:40 | sean-k-mooney | anyway i woudl not be against re reviewing the spec and appoving it and contining to review/merge the feature | |
| 16:38:52 | sean-k-mooney | even before we offically release 2026.1 | |
| 16:39:06 | sean-k-mooney | i just think we should take the checkpoint with rc1 and create the sable branch first | |
| 16:39:15 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: you mean once rc1 is cut and master becomes 2026.2 right? | |
| 16:39:27 | sean-k-mooney | yep | |
| 16:39:39 | dansmith | yeah, agree, I don't see how it could be any other way | |
| 16:39:48 | sean-k-mooney | im not commeting on the readyness of the remaining patches because the last time i looked in detail was december | |
| 16:40:27 | bauzas | at least operators can support vtpm live migration by G, which is cool | |
| 16:40:32 | dansmith | last actual review on the deployment patch was you, from Aug 2024 :) | |
| 16:40:37 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: ^ | |
| 16:40:39 | bauzas | they will only set it per host | |
| 16:41:13 | bauzas | for the deployment support, we can make it a short-term priority for Hibiscus given the existing momentum | |
| 16:41:18 | sean-k-mooney | :) i deployed something in decemer and played with the series a bit before going on PTO but i have entirlly ejected that form my memory | |
| 16:41:40 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: even though I get your point about minimal code change for deployment, it's still the largest perceptual change of the lot | |
| 16:41:52 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: it puts the users not in control of their TPM key | |
| 16:41:57 | sean-k-mooney | yep | |
| 16:42:11 | dansmith | _that_ is why it seemed it should go last to me | |
| 16:42:39 | sean-k-mooney | yep i get that | |
| 16:42:48 | opendevreview | Thibaut Démaret proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Spec for default SSD rotation rate on instance disks https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/979696 | |
| 16:43:19 | sean-k-mooney | if we are agreed that this is not in socpe of a FFE are we ok to repoease and review the spec/code once rc1 is cut and master is 2026.2 | |
| 16:43:43 | sean-k-mooney | i mean the repopposal can happen now | |
| 16:44:00 | sean-k-mooney | just are we ok with that directionally so we can move on to other topic or is there anything else to raise | |
| 16:44:01 | dansmith | yeah, are we going to just kick the whole spec to 2026.2 or trim it down to just the "...add deployment" part? | |
| 16:44:09 | bauzas | we can trim it if we want | |
| 16:44:13 | dansmith | but that detail aside, yep, good to move on | |
| 16:44:38 | dansmith | I think it might be nice to mark the first two modes as completed in this cycle | |
| 16:44:51 | dansmith | and then just deployment for 2026.2... I know that's more work for melwitt tho... | |
| 16:44:53 | sean-k-mooney | trim is proably better but i dont have a strong prefence either way | |
| 16:44:56 | melwitt | I wondered about that too. to maybe trim and then make a new blueprint also or? | |
| 16:45:27 | sean-k-mooney | yep that proably for the best | |
| 16:46:00 | melwitt | yeah I was thinking about that about being able to mark the host mode as completed tihs cycle. ok, I will do this | |
| 16:46:05 | dansmith | ++ | |
| 16:46:10 | sean-k-mooney | that wasy we can close the curent oen and leave a not the the deployment part was defereed | |
| 16:46:46 | melwitt | ++ | |
| 16:47:22 | melwitt | ok, thanks all for the discussion | |
| 16:48:14 | Uggla | melwitt just ping me when the trim is ok. | |
| 16:48:33 | melwitt | will do, thanks Uggla | |
| 16:48:49 | Uggla | so I could adjust BP and spec move patch. | |
| 16:50:04 | Uggla | ok I guess we are good with this topic. | |
| 16:50:30 | Uggla | Does someone want to discuss something else. | |
| 16:50:34 | nicolairuckel | Is https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/2TF4CXQUCP4Y24PAKZQGM2D5BONL5Z34/ covered by https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/979685? Unfortunately, that bug blocks my backports of the vTPM and NVRAM patches. :/ | |
| 16:51:49 | tkajinam | nicolairuckel, I think that config_format problems is different but it was fixed by https://review.opendev.org/c/zuul/zuul-jobs/+/979136 | |
| 16:51:56 | Uggla | melwitt can you answer ^ ? | |
| 16:52:08 | tkajinam | nicolairuckel, but we still need 979685 to fix doc job in 2025.2 | |
| 16:52:20 | elodilles | yepp, what tkajinam says. i can second that | |
| 16:52:34 | nicolairuckel | thanks, I missed the first fix | |
| 16:53:08 | elodilles | nicolairuckel: i'll review your backport when i get there o:) | |
| 16:53:40 | nicolairuckel | After 979685 I can restart the CI jobs? | |
| 16:53:45 | nicolairuckel | Thanks. :D | |
| 16:54:14 | elodilles | no problem | |
| 16:54:35 | tkajinam | or you can rebase your backport on 979685 | |
| 16:54:45 | tkajinam | I think even depends-on works | |
| 16:54:56 | tkajinam | (to check whether 979685 fixes the problem blocking your backport | |
| 16:55:09 | tkajinam | we can discuss it outside of the meeting, I think | |
| 16:55:13 | nicolairuckel | oh, that's a good idea | |
| 16:55:15 | nicolairuckel | yeah | |
| 16:57:15 | Uggla | ok some last minute point to discuss ? | |
| 16:58:02 | Uggla | seems not. | |
| 16:58:23 | Uggla | I'm skipping bug scrubbing part because we are at the top of the hour. | |
| 16:59:21 | Uggla | so time to close, thanks for joining this meeting. Have a nice day/evening and see you next week. | |
| 16:59:53 | Uggla | #endmeeting | |
| 16:59:53 | opendevmeet | Meeting ended Mon Mar 9 16:59:53 2026 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | |
| 16:59:53 | opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2026/nova.2026-03-09-16.00.html | |
| 16:59:53 | opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2026/nova.2026-03-09-16.00.txt | |
| 16:59:53 | opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2026/nova.2026-03-09-16.00.log.html | |
| 16:59:58 | elodilles | thanks Uggla! have a nice evening o/ | |
| 17:00:05 | kaisers | After meeting follow up request: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/977300 needs a second +2, it’s a small driver re-support change I brought up here recently already, would be great to have this back in sync with Cinder before the release. | |
| 17:00:09 | Uggla | elodilles thank you, same for you. | |
| 17:00:34 | kaisers | thnx | |
| 17:00:44 | kaisers | & o/ | |
| 17:00:46 | nicolairuckel | thanks, have a nice day | |
| 17:01:10 | nicolairuckel | Can I do the depends-on in Gerrit? | |
| 17:01:22 | tkajinam | thanks | |
| 17:01:34 | tkajinam | nicolairuckel, can you provide the link to your backport ? | |
| 17:01:35 | sean-k-mooney | nicolairuckel: in genral that shoudl work on stable as well yes | |
| 17:01:44 | nicolairuckel | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/978908/7 | |
| 17:01:50 | opendevreview | Thibaut Démaret proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Spec for default SSD rotation rate on instance disks https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/979696 | |