Open Stack

On 12-12-19 12:49:57, Brett Milford wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 11:15 PM Gorka Eguileor <geguileo at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 06/12, Brett Milford wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 3:54 AM Matt Riedemann <mriedemos at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 10/17/2019 5:24 AM, Gorka Eguileor wrote:
> > > > > I stand by my initial recommendation, being able to update the existing
> > > > > attachment to add the connection information from Nova.
> > > >
> > > > OK, thanks for the input and thoughtfulness on this. I've abandoned my
> > > > change since I'm not going to be pushing this boulder anymore but left
> > > > notes in the change in case someone else wants to pick it up some day.
> > > >
> > > > Note to nova cores: this means we'll have legacy volume attachment
> > > > compat code around forever.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Matt
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hi Groka, Cinder & Nova devs,
> > >
> > > Following up this thread from the context of
> > > https://review.opendev.org/#/c/579004/
> > >
> > > To summarise the discussion:
> > >   - initialize_connection shouldn't be called more than once, as it
> > > may mess up some drivers.
> > >   - To (safely) refresh connection_info a new api for cinder is required.
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > It may be a new API or a modification of one of the existing ones.
> >
> >
> > >   - a patch to nova, such as #579004 could make a call to this new api
> > > to refresh connection info on events such as reboot.
> > >
> > > Is there any other context to this issue I've missed or an alternate
> > > path to solving this?
> > >
> > > Does the creation of a new api for cinder have any implications for
> > > being able to backport this patch for nova?
> > >
> >
> > I don't think backporting it in Nova would do us much good, since the
> > Cinder code would not be backportable (it's a new feature, not a bug
> > fix).
> >
> >
> > > What would be the process for me to kick off this work?
> > >
> >
> > You should propose a Cinder spec [1] for your work and you may provide a
> > WIP patch to Cinder at the same time, though depending on the review you
> > may have to completely change that code later.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Gorka.
> >
> > [1]: https://opendev.org/openstack/cinder-specs
> >
> > > Thanks for your help,
> > > Brett (bcm)
> > > --
> > > ❯ brett
> > >
> >
> 
> Cheers Matt, Groka, I thought this might be the case.

Did anyone on the Cinder side pickup the connection_info refresh or
export(?) to attachment migration work in the end here? I can't see
anything but just wanted to ask before proposing something for V.

Cheers,

-- 
Lee Yarwood                 A5D1 9385 88CB 7E5F BE64  6618 BCA6 6E33 F672 2D76
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20200421/f180e65c/attachment.sig>