Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2026-04-30
12:10:33 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: Fix invalid jsonschema for keypair list response https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/986660
12:56:16 opendevreview Merged openstack/os-vif master: Remove url tags from README https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/976271
15:47:18 dansmith gibi: I'm not sure if my point is getting across in the spec reviews.. I'm not really blocking on anything I just feel like we're taking an already very confusing syntax and blowing it up, which I think is unfortunate
16:01:00 gibi dansmith: yeah I agree that the config syntax is complicated. I like your idea of listing addresses to define the group. I just went one step further and wanted to do that in a separate group_spec option not directly in the already complicated device_spec optikn
16:01:05 gibi *option
16:01:45 gibi I think we are not *ready* with the spec so your comment alone is not blocking anything
16:02:20 gibi I think we are exploring the possible configurations to express a group right now
16:02:31 gibi so no hard feeling at all
16:03:16 gibi (if I come accross as angry in my comment then sorry it wasn't the intention, today I got angry on a totally unrealted thing but I guess some then leaked into my spec comment)
16:05:37 dansmith oh no, no leakage that I noticed I'm just trying to make sure it's clear that "I don't like this but I don't really know what the best plan is"
16:05:55 dansmith and it's really just about the actual [pci] syntax part
16:06:11 gibi OK cool then
16:06:33 gibi I do want to spend still couple of back and forth before settle on the syntax. I think it is worth exploring the possibilities
16:07:05 gibi honestly the [pci]device_spec allows too many things already
16:07:11 dansmith for sure
16:07:39 dansmith can you answer though - is it just managed=True that needs to be per-device instead of per-group?
16:10:13 gibi I think live_migratable is also per device, especially if we eventually extend that flag to support live migration via unplug and replug (how we do it for neutron port requested PCI devs today). phyiscal_network can be a per device in the future when we start supporting neutron port requested PCI device with PCI in Placement.
16:10:41 gibi one_time_use is an edge case that does not need to be per device today
16:11:08 gibi but logically if I group an NVME and a NIC and I want to define that the NVME in the group the one that needs the cleaning then
16:11:31 gibi it would be better to model one_time_use on the device instead of on the group
16:11:37 dansmith live_migratable is per group though right? you can't have a group with one migratable device and one not
16:12:20 dansmith I guess I'm not sure why you would group a nic and a nvme together, but fair enough - for the cleaning it makes more sense to account for them individually
16:12:44 gibi imagine that we start grouping a "normally" live_migratable GPU with a NIC that is stateless and should not prevent the live migration but instead we will allow saying for the NIC that live_migratable=unplug
16:13:05 dansmith I know we _should_ be able to group any two devices for any reason, but it's also okay for this to be minimally useful and leave complex scenarios to cyborg :)
16:13:59 dansmith that unplug case could be a cyborg-only too I think, but yeah fair as well
16:15:04 gibi the whole grouping could be / should be cybog only :D
16:15:34 dansmith right, which is why I guess I'm (perhaps too) willing to have some limitations :D
16:15:50 dansmith but okay so sounds like we have to keep the device_spec lines per device
16:16:36 dansmith the "name" is required for each group so we know which provider in placement goes with each set of devices right?
16:19:59 gibi yeah the name is an ugly leak of how we implement resource tracking
16:20:08 gibi we need to name the RP in placement with a stable name
16:20:30 dansmith I _hate_ that
16:20:32 gibi I thought about generating it from the hash of the PCI addresses in the group but that is still not stable
16:20:36 gibi I hate it too
16:21:05 dansmith yeah, I also thought .. even just the one/first pci address would be enough, no?
16:21:16 dansmith but it makes it a bit messy on the backend in case the order changes, etc
16:21:41 gibi so far I thought we allow reconfiguring the content of a *not allocated* group
16:21:51 gibi that breaks naming by address
16:22:03 gibi I thought about just indexing group-type-1 -2 -3
16:22:17 gibi but then we will be config line order dependent
16:22:47 dansmith sorted(group.addresses)[0] would be somewhat stable against rerders
16:22:53 dansmith but if they add a new earlier one it won't of course
16:23:30 dansmith either way, I think "name" is the wrong label for this thing.. it's an identifier, a key, a ... something
16:23:57 dansmith "name" is really most appropriate for the alias, IMHO, the rest are basically FK's
16:27:10 gibi OK that is fair
16:27:35 gibi key works fo rme
16:27:38 gibi *for me
16:27:51 gibi we even save a char in each def :D
16:29:33 dansmith ack, I'm not too concerned over the char of course, but the meaning
16:30:22 gibi I know, I just entertain myself with the saving of chars :D
16:31:13 dansmith and I guess we could have more than one alias reference a type of group? I'm not sure why really, but I assume that's "desirable"
16:31:43 dansmith ugh, I'm getting 403 from docs.o.o
16:32:52 gibi yes two alias can refer to the same group_type but can asks for different traits, and two groups in the same group_type can have two different set of traits. I have no good example why this would be useful but the current alias syntax allows it today already
16:33:06 gibi ohh I have a good example
16:33:18 gibi two alias can differ in numa_policy
16:33:39 dansmith yeah okay
16:33:41 gibi so you want two GPUs but one alias give with with NUMA affinity required the other just preferres
16:33:45 gibi * preferred
16:35:03 dansmith I wish that we could have alias reference device_spec or group_spec things instead of the devices (by address or vendor/model) and was just thinking of other ways to collapse that a bit
16:35:06 dansmith but probably not possible
16:35:35 dansmith alias can find things by address, vendor/model, and now group_type.. just feels far too undefined
16:35:51 gibi yeah I know
16:36:28 gibi at least alias with a group_type is better in my eyes than using vendor/product
16:37:14 dansmith yes definitely, and kinda where I was going with "group with one device".. I don't want to make things more complicated, but having alias reference only a group, which references device_specs would be a nicer hierarchy
16:37:26 dansmith *group_type I should say
16:37:35 gibi hm
16:38:18 gibi so we i) add group_type to alias ii)allow one device per group in the group_spec 3) deprecate vendor/product in alias 4)... 5) profit
16:38:47 dansmith 4) annoy people with more typing for no reason
16:38:55 dansmith it would be a better diagram but not a better UX I imagine
16:39:20 dansmith if we could imply the auto-generated single-device group type maybe, but idk
16:39:23 gibi nah, people we use LLMs to generate the config :D
16:39:39 dansmith lol, of course
16:39:43 dansmith silly me
16:40:47 dansmith maybe then 4) sell the users an LLM as the only way to actually generate this config so that 5) profit
16:41:53 gibi I need to start frontier model company, easy-peasy
16:42:22 dansmith that's the obvious solution to any problem in 2026
16:43:29 gibi tomorrow is public holiday here so I will have time to *plan* :D
17:03:41 opendevreview Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add unpin-az spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/986539
18:39:16 gouthamr hey melwitt: question regarding the ML post and this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2149965
18:40:22 gouthamr i was curious if the migration flow in any way _need_ cephadm? i.e., does anything run "ceph orch" commands? i wasn't able to find that info and was wondering
18:41:59 gouthamr melwitt: how did you arrive at that ceph orch being the problem is i guess my question
18:42:40 melwitt gouthamr: sorry, I didn't include info info in the bug, I did it in haste. I don't think so -- my assumption is that things failed during ceph installation, well before any tests were run. this is an example run https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/2199510cc500444b9638763287ebc62f
18:42:48 melwitt *include enough info
18:43:26 gouthamr i see, it's happening on the migration job, but, that's unrelated
18:43:53 gouthamr melwitt: thanks.. that was my initial thought; maybe that part of the handling is just .. flaky
18:44:47 gouthamr melwitt: the job history is pretty decent: https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?job_name=nova-live-migration-ceph
18:45:12 melwitt gouthamr: yeah I wondered if maybe something is just not waiting for 'ceph mgr module enable orchestrator' to finish or something like that?
18:45:45 melwitt yeah. it is definitely a "sometimes" bug but I have personally seen it a lot enough to ask someone if they know something to stop it haha
18:46:32 gouthamr melwitt: ack, i've added some retry logic here: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph/+/986818
18:46:32 gouthamr so we don't bail out early..
18:47:00 gouthamr disabling cephadm isn't necessary.. just something that'll help save resources if we have nothing more to setup/change on the ceph cluster
18:47:52 melwitt ah gotcha, makes sense
18:49:37 gouthamr sean-k-mooney headed in the same direction.. so i guess we can see if this helps with stability. thanks for flagging this
18:50:15 melwitt thanks you for looking at it :)
18:50:31 sean-k-mooney so i looked at the plugin breifly but didn know which job failed
18:50:41 sean-k-mooney so i didnt knwo which method was actully the failure
18:51:03 sean-k-mooney gouthamr: i saw you patch to add the retry on disable but i suspect that wasint the issue
18:51:32 sean-k-mooney perhaps it was but i was assomign like mel that it was happenign durign the install
18:52:15 melwitt I added another comment on https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2149965 to explain a bit more, for future reference
18:52:54 gouthamr sean-k-mooney: the restart you stated is an internal ceph thingy - we don't explicitly ask to restart.. the manager module reloads things each time and during that reload the API is down.. so "orch" just throws a random error: "set a backend

Earlier   Later