| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2026-06-12 | |||
| 17:09:46 | dansmith | okay sorry about that.. I had a successful run in my terminal buffer from when I removed everything but the update samples | |
| 17:10:36 | dansmith | then when I was rebasing to apply the change to the first commit I must have lost the inheritance part and then running made me add the get/list things back in so I thought I had stale samples on disk last time or something | |
| 17:11:11 | gmaan | k | |
| 17:11:41 | dansmith | trying to get claude to "help" with this stuff is maybe not the best plan past initial generation.. like having a pair programmer messing with things on disk while you're trying to clean up :) | |
| 17:12:25 | gmaan | yeah, i think you should change the tag also now as you updated it manually https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/990682/comment/9a9abe22_4f0d2b93/ | |
| 17:13:00 | dansmith | gmaan: meh | |
| 17:13:19 | dansmith | it's still mostly generated and I think the tag is still okay | |
| 17:13:31 | dansmith | Generated-By: claude, Fixed-By: human meat bag | |
| 17:14:08 | melwitt | claude has been betraying me a lot lately | |
| 17:14:56 | dansmith | same | |
| 17:15:32 | dansmith | there's betrayal and there's also the aspect of just being a third thing competing for context... you have on-disk state, you have in-git state, you have the current state of your editor, and then whatever claude is doing | |
| 17:15:36 | melwitt | in my commit message tag I also include the claude code version bc I think it's interesting and it's been updated/upgraded at least twice since I stated this morning | |
| 17:15:45 | melwitt | *started | |
| 17:16:28 | melwitt | so I'm like 🙏 they are fixing things | |
| 17:16:41 | gmaan | it is difficult to say if Generated-By is still ok when we modified the generated code but does not matter much anyways | |
| 17:16:58 | melwitt | Clauded-By | |
| 17:18:21 | sean-k-mooney | well i nomrally update to assisted-by once i have reworked some | |
| 17:18:32 | sean-k-mooney | but generate by does not have to mean entrilly llm output | |
| 17:18:52 | melwitt | I never use Generated-By, problem solved | |
| 17:19:06 | melwitt | #efficiency | |
| 17:19:28 | sean-k-mooney | ya for many things is v 2 or 3 before i push for review the first time anyway | |
| 17:22:31 | sean-k-mooney | as an aside how ould folk feel about add a funtional py 3.14 job, myign the unit test job voting and maybe moving the coverage job to 3.14 as well | |
| 17:23:13 | sean-k-mooney | the reason i ask is openstack-tox-py314 has been passing stablty for a good few weeks | |
| 17:23:28 | sean-k-mooney | and if the funciotnal job also passes we coudl mvoe coverge to 3.14 | |
| 17:23:51 | sean-k-mooney | and look into the alternitve backend that stephen mentioned that speed it up | |
| 17:24:59 | melwitt | on coverage, I asked claude about it again today and it said tl;dr that you can only get the speedup without eventlet | |
| 17:25:18 | melwitt | which I guess we can't do bc coverage runs functional now too | |
| 17:25:59 | melwitt | "There it is — concurrency = ["eventlet"] in pyproject.toml forces coverage.py to use sys.settrace instead of sys.monitoring, even on Python 3.12+. That's likely the biggest performance hit." | |
| 17:26:26 | sean-k-mooney | hum ok well we are getting closer on functionla coverage in threading mode | |
| 17:26:35 | melwitt | *we can't switch coverage to native threading bc we don't have the func tests sorted out yet | |
| 17:26:37 | sean-k-mooney | so maybe we can just run it in threading mode in a bit | |
| 17:26:45 | melwitt | yeah | |
| 17:28:09 | sean-k-mooney | i might put up a patch thetn jsut for makeing the py314 unit test voting and addign a non voting functionl 3.14 job to see how that goes | |
| 17:28:16 | melwitt | I had tried a patch to help with that and then lots of unrelated stuff happened and I dropped the ball | |
| 17:47:44 | melwitt | gmaan: fyi I noticed you got some questions on the graceful shutdown func tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/991743 so I cc'ed myself when you have got a chance to reply | |
| 17:49:46 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: I just approved https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/993109 but then I wondered, shouldn't that change go in whitebox not nova? | |
| 17:50:13 | sean-k-mooney | whitebox is not branched | |
| 17:50:31 | sean-k-mooney | so normally in whitebox we do the opisce of tempet | |
| 17:50:44 | sean-k-mooney | we disabel new tests and make them opt in | |
| 17:50:59 | melwitt | ohhh ok | |
| 17:51:01 | sean-k-mooney | tempest enables them on master and then uses stable patchs | |
| 17:51:12 | sean-k-mooney | so gman wanted to go the tempest way which is fine | |
| 17:51:34 | sean-k-mooney | we did it the other way in whitebox historically because our downstream used ot direcly use master | |
| 17:51:58 | sean-k-mooney | so we coudl not assume the only user of whitebox was our first praty zuul | |
| 17:53:16 | sean-k-mooney | we also need to fix or disble the hugepage tests to get the stable branches green again it seams | |
| 17:53:20 | melwitt | yeah | |
| 17:55:07 | sean-k-mooney | im not entirly sure why | |
| 17:55:13 | sean-k-mooney | because i dont see those test runing on master | |
| 17:56:04 | sean-k-mooney | this is not a firday after noone problem | |
| 17:56:25 | sean-k-mooney | we can fix the rest later | |
| 17:57:40 | melwitt | yeah I am a bit lost tbh :) | |
| 17:57:55 | sean-k-mooney | we were not runing stable jobs on the plugin repo | |
| 17:58:01 | melwitt | you're saying from the periodic whitebox job you don't see hugepages test running | |
| 17:58:04 | sean-k-mooney | so we didnt notice when we broke stable | |
| 17:58:37 | sean-k-mooney | there is a seprate whitebox-devstack-multinode-hugepages job | |
| 17:59:11 | sean-k-mooney | https://storage.bhs.cloud.ovh.net/v1/AUTH_dcaab5e32b234d56b626f72581e3644c/zuul_opendev_logs_29c/openstack/29c8adb8349b437bb53993094287774d/testr_results.html | |
| 17:59:24 | sean-k-mooney | that was https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/29c8adb8349b437bb53993094287774d | |
| 17:59:27 | melwitt | gibi: if you dare https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/993059 (had to change fix due to first fix not working). sean and I have been running all unit tests in a loop for > 1 hour and no fails yet so we are hoping this is stable now | |
| 17:59:43 | melwitt | oh, right | |
| 18:00:10 | sean-k-mooney | but that is not the hugepages job | |
| 18:00:19 | sean-k-mooney | so im not entirly sure why those ran | |
| 18:00:39 | sean-k-mooney | given it has tempest_exclude_regex:"^whitebox_tempest_plugin\.api\.compute\.test_hugepages" | |
| 18:00:42 | melwitt | _magic_ | |
| 18:00:53 | sean-k-mooney | oh | |
| 18:01:03 | sean-k-mooney | ok no so gibie broke it in the previosu platch | |
| 18:01:11 | sean-k-mooney | when he added tempest_exclude_regex: (test_vtpm_live_migration_secret_security_host) | |
| 18:01:18 | sean-k-mooney | it overrote the hugepage exclude | |
| 18:01:24 | sean-k-mooney | so we need to exlude both | |
| 18:01:27 | melwitt | wait what | |
| 18:01:46 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/993109/2/.zuul.yaml | |
| 18:01:53 | melwitt | do we need to pull the patch from the gate | |
| 18:01:59 | sean-k-mooney | just did | |
| 18:02:06 | melwitt | ok good thanks | |
| 18:02:16 | sean-k-mooney | and its not any more broken then it was before | |
| 18:02:33 | sean-k-mooney | ill leave a comment explaining now | |
| 18:02:49 | melwitt | yeah. I didn't know nowadays what's the easiest way to pull a patch. I had thought in the past -W didn't work but that was probably ages ago | |
| 18:04:48 | sean-k-mooney | so -w wont pull it | |
| 18:04:58 | sean-k-mooney | but it will prevent zuul form submitting it | |
| 18:05:09 | sean-k-mooney | the easisly way to pull it as in stop the job | |
| 18:05:11 | sean-k-mooney | is to rebase | |
| 18:05:28 | melwitt | ah gotcha | |
| 18:06:21 | sean-k-mooney | oh looks like they impoved it in zuul | |
| 18:06:37 | sean-k-mooney | it -2'd with "This change is unable to merge due to a missing merge requirement." | |
| 18:06:48 | sean-k-mooney | the same as if a depend on failes or goes into merge conflict | |
| 18:09:05 | gmaan | melwitt: yeah, i need to fix those first. thanks | |
| 18:09:13 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: very cool | |
| 18:10:47 | sean-k-mooney | gmaan: fyi https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/whitebox-tempest-plugin/+/992998/comment/1c2bae72_2cb0d3e5/ the whitebox jobs need nested virt and multinode nodeset | |
| 18:10:55 | sean-k-mooney | so that why that is failing | |
| 18:13:41 | gmaan | sean-k-mooney: thanks, did not get chance to check if those are passing, fixed. | |
| 18:17:00 | sean-k-mooney | actully | |
| 18:17:14 | sean-k-mooney | gmaan: so to melwitt's point | |
| 18:17:25 | sean-k-mooney | for thos to pass we need the fixes that gibi is making in nova | |
| 18:17:31 | sean-k-mooney | so instead fo doing that | |
| 18:17:44 | sean-k-mooney | why dont we fix those in whitebox in the new jobs | |
| 18:17:56 | sean-k-mooney | and then change the job we are running on stable | |
| 18:18:29 | gmaan | you mean separate jobs to run on stable | |
| 18:18:30 | sean-k-mooney | since they are perodic we dont care about the overried checkout | |
| 18:19:04 | sean-k-mooney | ya so the master jobs your addign on master | |
| 18:19:07 | gmaan | we can, I think that will be easy to maintain things on one side (whitebox plugin) | |
| 18:19:17 | gmaan | let me do it | |