| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2026-03-09 | |||
| 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 | |
| 17:02:52 | tkajinam | nicolairuckel, Add Depends-on: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/979685 to the commit message. Probably right above Signed-Off-By | |
| 17:03:04 | tkajinam | oh, wait | |
| 17:03:05 | tkajinam | not that one | |
| 17:03:07 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/979685 | |
| 17:03:13 | sean-k-mooney | is fixing the docs job in placment | |
| 17:03:18 | tkajinam | I guess we need the fix for nova | |
| 17:03:24 | sean-k-mooney | right | |
| 17:03:25 | tkajinam | yeah | |
| 17:03:30 | elodilles | nicolairuckel: i think you don't need to do a depends-on as your patch is in nova repo and the broken job is not placement related | |
| 17:03:53 | sean-k-mooney | there actul failre is the tox-cover job | |
| 17:03:59 | sean-k-mooney | and that was fixed globally right | |
| 17:04:10 | tkajinam | oh yes | |
| 17:04:13 | tkajinam | just recheck | |
| 17:04:13 | elodilles | tkajinam: nicolairuckel: i think we don't need the fix as it was already fixed on Friday | |
| 17:04:16 | nicolairuckel | So just recheck? | |
| 17:04:20 | elodilles | yepp, what sean-k-mooney | |
| 17:04:26 | elodilles | says | |
| 17:04:27 | tkajinam | AttributeError: 'Parsed' object has no attribute 'config_format' | |
| 17:04:41 | tkajinam | that's the root cause and that was fixed by the zuul-job update | |
| 17:04:44 | tkajinam | nicolairuckel, yup | |
| 17:04:47 | sean-k-mooney | ya that was fixed in zuul-jobs | |
| 17:05:48 | elodilles | nicolairuckel: i'll try to look into your patch tomorrow as it's already end of day to me now o:) | |
| 17:06:07 | nicolairuckel | For me too | |
| 17:06:09 | nicolairuckel | thanks | |
| 17:06:13 | sean-k-mooney | nicolairuckel: https://review.opendev.org/c/zuul/zuul-jobs/+/979136 for context | |
| 17:06:44 | sean-k-mooney | nicolairuckel: while we often have interestign ci issue near feature freeze this cycle has been extra special due to all the upstream packaging changes | |
| 17:09:12 | nicolairuckel | I'm just always confused when jobs that I can't reproduce locally break. | |
| 17:09:32 | dansmith | Uggla: this is not a regression, but probably pretty safe and the case it makes is pretty compelling: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/958556 | |
| 17:09:38 | dansmith | I had not seen this before, unfortunately | |
| 17:13:44 | Uggla | dansmith, I said there are interesting patches in the list. :) | |
| 17:15:16 | Uggla | At least for me it is ok to merge things even if it is safe and useful. | |
| 17:16:11 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: thoughts? ^ | |
| 17:16:57 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla: my question would be what benifit does merging them now vs backporting them in a week by? | |
| 17:17:32 | sean-k-mooney | if its a bug that we feel comfortable merging 2 day before RC1 while we may not consider it valid for an RC2 | |
| 17:17:43 | sean-k-mooney | we likely woudl condier backportign it to sable after the release is done | |
| 17:17:59 | sean-k-mooney | if its not a bug i.e. a small feature we are well past FF | |
| 17:18:24 | sean-k-mooney | if there was a small spefic patch you tought was worth merging i am not against lookign at that | |
| 17:18:41 | sean-k-mooney | jsut the tiem to "merge the thign that are close" in my mind was the week before FF | |
| 17:19:10 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: linked above.. it's sort of a performance bug, 2s query every give minutes in a periodic that goes to 0s with an index | |
| 17:19:21 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: on where you askign for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/958556 specificly | |