[openstack-dev] [nova][qa] Do we turn on voting for the tempest-dsvm-cells job?

Matt Riedemann mriedem at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Mon Jun 22 22:03:50 UTC 2015

On 6/22/2015 4:38 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> On 6/22/2015 4:32 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
>> On 06/22/2015 05:23 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
>>> The check-tempest-dsvm-cells job has been in nova's check queue since
>>> January as non-voting and has been stable for a couple of weeks now, so
>>> before it's regressed melwitt proposed a change to making it voting and
>>> gating on nova changes [1].
>>> I raised a concern in that change that the tempest-dsvm-cells job is not
>>> in the check queue for tempest or devstack changes, so if a change is
>>> merged in tempest/devstack which breaks the cells job, it will block
>>> nova changes from merging.
>>> mtreinish noted that tempest already has around 30 jobs running against
>>> it right now in the check queue, so he'd prefer that another one isn't
>>> added since the nova API shouldn't be different in the case of cells,
>>> but we know there are quirks.  That can be seen from the massive regex
>>> of excluded tests for the tempest-dvsm-cells job [2].
>>> If we could turn that regex list into tempest configurations, I think
>>> that would make it possible to not have to run tempest changes through
>>> the cells job in the check queue but also feel reasonably confident that
>>> changes to tempest that use the config options properly won't break the
>>> cells job (and block nova in the gate).
>>> This is actually something we should do regardless of voting or not on
>>> nova since new tests get added which might not fall in the regex and
>>> break the cells job.  So I'm going to propose some changes so that the
>>> regex will be moved to devstack-gate (regex exodus (tm)) and we'll work
>>> on whittling down the regex there (and run those d-g changes against the
>>> tempest-dsvm-cells job in the experimental queue).
>>> The question for the nova team is, shall we make the tempest-dsvm-cells
>>> job voting on nova changes knowing that the gate can be broken with a
>>> change to tempest that isn't caught in the regex?  In my opinion I think
>>> we should make it voting so we don't regress cells with changes to nova
>>> that go unnoticed with the non-voting job today.  Cells v2 is a nova
>>> priority for Liberty so we don't want setbacks now that it's stable.
>>> If a change does land in tempest which breaks the cells job and blocks
>>> nova, we (1) fix it or (2) modify the regex so it's excluded until fixed
>>> as has been done up to this point.
>>> I think we should probably mull this over in the ML and then vote on it
>>> in this week's nova meeting.
>>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/190894/
>>> [2]
>>> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/project-config/tree/jenkins/jobs/devstack-gate.yaml#n1004
>> Regarding your "regex exodus", I recently added something for this.  In
>> another project, I'm setting the regex in a file I keep in the code repo
>> instead of project-config.
>> support for DEVSTACK_GATE_SETTINGS in devstack-gate:
>> https://review.openstack.org/190321
>> usage in a job definition: https://review.openstack.org/190325
>> https://review.openstack.org/186894
>> It all seems to be working for me, except I still need to tweak my regex
>> to get the job passing, but at least I can do that without updating
>> project-config now.
> Awesome, that is way cleaner.  I'll go that route instead, thanks!

Here is the change that moves the regex into nova:




Matt Riedemann

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list