Open Stack

On 01/25/2019 12:04 PM, Terry Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 7:34 PM Ghanshyam Mann <gmann at ghanshyammann.com> wrote:
> 
>> As Sean also pointed that in patch that we should go for the approach of
>> "making sure all attached interface to server is active, server is sshable
>>   bthe efore server can be used in test" [1]. This is something we agreed
>>   in Denver PTG for afazekas proposal[2].
>>
>> If we see the  from user perspective , user can have an Active VM with
>> active port which can flip to down in between of that port usage. This seems bug to me.
> 
> To me, this ignores real-world situations where a port status *can*
> change w/o user interaction.

How is this ignoring that scenario?

> It seems weird to ignore a status change
> if it is detected. In the case that we hit, it was a change to os-vif
> where it was recreating a port.

Which was a bug, right?

> But it could just as easily be some vendor-specific "that port just
> died" kind of thing.

In which case, the test waiting for SSH to be available would timeout 
because connectivity would be broken anyway, no?

 >
Why not update the status of the port if you
> know it has changed? 

Sorry, I don't see where anyone is suggesting not changing the status of 
the port if some non-bug real scenario changes the status of the port?

> Also, the patch itself (outside the ironic case) just adds a window
> for the status to bounce.

Unless I'm mistaken, the patch is simply changing the condition that the 
tempest test uses to identify broken VM connectivity. It will use the 
SSH connectivity test instead of looking at the port status test.

The SSH test was determined to be a more stable test of VM network 
connectivity than relying on the Neutron port status indicator which can 
be a little flaky.

Or am I missing something?

-jay