August 2020 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[tripleo][validations] new Validation Framework demos
by Mathieu Bultel 29 Sep '20

29 Sep '20

Hey TripleO, I have recorded three demos with the new Validation Framework (VF): 1st demo is similar to what Gael did few months ago but with the new code refactored (validations-libs/validations-common projects): https://asciinema.org/a/NRLULghjJa87qxRD9Nfq0FYoa 2nd demo is a use of the VF without any openstack/TripleO prerequisite, on a fresh and empty Ubuntu docker container, with only validations-libs and validations-common projects. It shows that only with a apt-get install git and python3-pip and with a basic python project installation we can run validations and use the framework: https://asciinema.org/a/2Jp9LZbN0xhJAR09zIpI6OpuB So it can answer a few demands such as: How to run validations as prep undercloud installation ? How to run validations on a non-openstack project ? What are the bare minimum requirements for being able to run Validations on a system ? May I run Validation remotely from my machine ? etc... The third one is mainly related to the deployment itself of TripleO. By using a simple PoC (https://review.opendev.org/#/c/724289/) I was able to make TripleO consuming the validations-libs framework and validation logging callback plugin. So it shows in this demo how the deploy steps playbook can be logged, parsed and shown with the VF CLI. This can be improve, modify & so on of course... it's basic usage. https://asciinema.org/a/344484 https://asciinema.org/a/344509 Mathieu.

4 5

[manila] Doc-a-thon event coming up next Thursday (Aug 6th)
by Victoria Martínez de la Cruz 24 Sep '20

24 Sep '20

Hi folks, We will be organizing a doc-a-thon next Thursday, August 6th, with the main goal of improving our docs for the next release. We will be gathering on our Freenode channel #openstack-manila after our weekly meeting (3pm UTC) and also using a videoconference tool (exact details TBC) to go over a curated list of opened doc bugs we have here [0]. *Your* participation is truly valued, being you an already Manila contributor or if you are interested in contributing and you didn't know how, so looking forward to seeing you there :) Cheers, Victoria [0] https://ethercalc.openstack.org/ur17jprbprxx

2 3

Trove images for Cluster testing.
by ARUNKUMAR PALANISAMY 23 Sep '20

23 Sep '20

Hello Team, My name is ARUNKUMAR PALANISAMY, As part of our project requirement, we are evaluating trove components and need your support for experimental datastore Image for testing cluster. (Redis, Cassandra, MongoDB, Couchbase) 1.) We are running devstack enviorment with Victoria Openstack release and with this image (trove-master-guest-ubuntu-bionic-dev.qcow2<https://tarballs.opendev.org/openstack/trove/images/trove-master-guest-ubun…>), we are able to deploy mysql instance and and getting below error while creating mongoDB instances. "ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'trove.guestagent.datastore.experimental' " 2.) While tried creating mongoDB image with diskimage-builder<https://opendev.org/openstack/diskimage-builder> tool, but we are getting "Block device " element error. Regards, Arunkumar Palanisamy Cell: +49 172 6972490 =====-----=====-----===== Notice: The information contained in this e-mail message and/or attachments to it may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, review, distribution, printing or copying of the information contained in this e-mail message and/or attachments to it are strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail or telephone and immediately and permanently delete the message and any attachments. Thank you

2 4

[baremetal-sig][ironic] Future work and regular meetings
by Arne Wiebalck 17 Sep '20

17 Sep '20

Dear all, With the release of the bare metal white paper [0] the bare metal SIG has completed its first target and is now ready to tackle new challenges. A number of potential topics the SIG could work on were raised during the recent opendev events. The suggestions are summarised on the bare metal etherpad [1]. To select and organise the future work, we feel that it may be better to start with regular meetings, though: the current idea is once a month, for one hour, on zoom. Based on the experience with the ad-hoc meetings we had so far I have set up a doodle to pick the exact slot: https://doodle.com/poll/3hpypw73455t2g24 If interested, please respond by the end of this week. Equally, if you have additional suggestions for the next focus of the SIG, do not hesitate to add them to [1]. Thanks! Arne [0] https://www.openstack.org/use-cases/bare-metal/how-ironic-delivers-abstract… [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/bare-metal-sig

1 1

[qa] Wallaby PTG planning
by Masayuki Igawa 17 Sep '20

17 Sep '20

Hi, We need to start thinking about the next cycle already. As you probably know, next virtual PTG will be held in October 26-30[0]. I prepared an etherpad[1] to discuss and track our topics. So, please add your name if you are going to attend the PTG session. And also, please add your proposals of the topics which you want to discuss during the PTG. I also made a doodle[2] with possible time slots. Please put your best days and hours so that we can try to schedule and book our sessions in the time slots. [0] https://www.openstack.org/ptg/ [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/qa-wallaby-ptg [2] https://doodle.com/poll/qqd7ayz3i4ubnsbb Best Regards, -- Masayuki Igawa Key fingerprint = C27C 2F00 3A2A 999A 903A 753D 290F 53ED C899 BF89

3 5

vPTG October 2020 Team Signup Reminder
by Kendall Waters 16 Sep '20

16 Sep '20

Hello Everyone! Wanted to give you all a reminder that the deadline for signing up teams for the PTG is approaching! The virtual PTG will be held from Monday October 26th to Friday October 30th, 2020. To signup your team, you must complete BOTH the survey[1] AND reserve time in the ethercalc[2] by September 11th at 7:00 UTC. We ask that the PTL/SIG Chair/Team lead sign up for time to have their discussions in with 4 rules/guidelines. 1. Cross project discussions (like SIGs or support project teams) should be scheduled towards the start of the week so that any discussions that might shape those of other teams happen first. 2. No team should sign up for more than 4 hours per UTC day to help keep participants actively engaged. 3. No team should sign up for more than 16 hours across all time slots to avoid burning out our contributors and to enable participation in multiple teams discussions. Once your team is signed up, please register[3]! And remind your team to register! Registration is free, but since it will be how we contact you with passwords, event details, etc. it is still important! If you have any questions, please let us know. -The Kendalls (diablo_rojo & wendallkaters) [1] Team Survey: https://openstackfoundation.formstack.com/forms/oct2020_vptg_survey <https://openstackfoundation.formstack.com/forms/oct2020_vptg_survey> [2] Ethercalc Signup: https://ethercalc.openstack.org/7xp2pcbh1ncb <https://ethercalc.openstack.org/7xp2pcbh1ncb> [3] PTG Registration: https://october2020ptg.eventbrite.com <https://october2020ptg.eventbrite.com/>

3 4

[nova][barbican][qa] barbican-tempest-plugin change breaking bfv [ceph]
by Mohammed Naser 15 Sep '20

15 Sep '20

Hi everyone, We just had our gating break due to a change merging inside barbican-tempest-plugin which is the following: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/515210/ It is resulting in an exception in our CI: 2020-08-26 18:04:32.663188 | controller | Response - Headers: {'content-length': '257', 'content-type': 'application/json', 'x-openstack-request-id': 'req-7f55e463-c3de-445e-a814-ef79c5f21235', 'connection': 'close', 'status': '409', 'content-location': 'http://glance.openstack.svc.cluster.local/v2/images/dec14e17-0870-415f-82a6…'} 2020-08-26 18:04:32.663200 | controller | Body: b'{"message": "Image dec14e17-0870-415f-82a6-140c1b7e4a39 could not be deleted because it is in use: The image cannot be deleted because it is in use through the backend store outside of Glance.<br /><br />\\n\\n\\n", "code": "409 Conflict", "title": "Conflict"}' This is usually because it's trying to delete the Glance image before deleting an instance that is using it, the specific test that is failing is: barbican_tempest_plugin.tests.scenario.test_certificate_validation.CertificateValidationTest.test_signed_image_invalid_cert_boot_failure[compute,id-6d354881-35a6-4568-94b8-2204bbf67b29,image] This test landed yesterday, we're blacklisting the scenario right now. I do find it quite interesting that in the logs here: http://paste.openstack.org/show/797186/ That the instance reports that it _does_ indeed delete it, so maybe we are trying to delete the image afterwards _too quickly_ and need to wait for Nova to clean up? I'd love to enable that test again and continue full coverage, happy to hear discussion. Thanks Mohammed -- Mohammed Naser VEXXHOST, Inc.

2 1

device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices
by Yan Zhao 15 Sep '20

15 Sep '20

hi folks, we are defining a device migration compatibility interface that helps upper layer stack like openstack/ovirt/libvirt to check if two devices are live migration compatible. The "devices" here could be MDEVs, physical devices, or hybrid of the two. e.g. we could use it to check whether - a src MDEV can migrate to a target MDEV, - a src VF in SRIOV can migrate to a target VF in SRIOV, - a src MDEV can migration to a target VF in SRIOV. (e.g. SIOV/SRIOV backward compatibility case) The upper layer stack could use this interface as the last step to check if one device is able to migrate to another device before triggering a real live migration procedure. we are not sure if this interface is of value or help to you. please don't hesitate to drop your valuable comments. (1) interface definition The interface is defined in below way: __ userspace /\ \ / \write / read \ ________/__________ ___\|/_____________ | migration_version | | migration_version |-->check migration --------------------- --------------------- compatibility device A device B a device attribute named migration_version is defined under each device's sysfs node. e.g. (/sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:00\:02.0/$mdev_UUID/migration_version). userspace tools read the migration_version as a string from the source device, and write it to the migration_version sysfs attribute in the target device. The userspace should treat ANY of below conditions as two devices not compatible: - any one of the two devices does not have a migration_version attribute - error when reading from migration_version attribute of one device - error when writing migration_version string of one device to migration_version attribute of the other device The string read from migration_version attribute is defined by device vendor driver and is completely opaque to the userspace. for a Intel vGPU, string format can be defined like "parent device PCI ID" + "version of gvt driver" + "mdev type" + "aggregator count". for an NVMe VF connecting to a remote storage. it could be "PCI ID" + "driver version" + "configured remote storage URL" for a QAT VF, it may be "PCI ID" + "driver version" + "supported encryption set". (to avoid namespace confliction from each vendor, we may prefix a driver name to each migration_version string. e.g. i915-v1-8086-591d-i915-GVTg_V5_8-1) (2) backgrounds The reason we hope the migration_version string is opaque to the userspace is that it is hard to generalize standard comparing fields and comparing methods for different devices from different vendors. Though userspace now could still do a simple string compare to check if two devices are compatible, and result should also be right, it's still too limited as it excludes the possible candidate whose migration_version string fails to be equal. e.g. an MDEV with mdev_type_1, aggregator count 3 is probably compatible with another MDEV with mdev_type_3, aggregator count 1, even their migration_version strings are not equal. (assumed mdev_type_3 is of 3 times equal resources of mdev_type_1). besides that, driver version + configured resources are all elements demanding to take into account. So, we hope leaving the freedom to vendor driver and let it make the final decision in a simple reading from source side and writing for test in the target side way. we then think the device compatibility issues for live migration with assigned devices can be divided into two steps: a. management tools filter out possible migration target devices. Tags could be created according to info from product specification. we think openstack/ovirt may have vendor proprietary components to create those customized tags for each product from each vendor. e.g. for Intel vGPU, with a vGPU(a MDEV device) in source side, the tags to search target vGPU are like: a tag for compatible parent PCI IDs, a tag for a range of gvt driver versions, a tag for a range of mdev type + aggregator count for NVMe VF, the tags to search target VF may be like: a tag for compatible PCI IDs, a tag for a range of driver versions, a tag for URL of configured remote storage. b. with the output from step a, openstack/ovirt/libvirt could use our proposed device migration compatibility interface to make sure the two devices are indeed live migration compatible before launching the real live migration process to start stream copying, src device stopping and target device resuming. It is supposed that this step would not bring any performance penalty as -in kernel it's just a simple string decoding and comparing -in openstack/ovirt, it could be done by extending current function check_can_live_migrate_destination, along side claiming target resources.[1] [1] https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/stein/approved/libvi… Thanks Yan

14 118

Re: [neutron][networking-midonet] Maintainers needed
by Sebastian Saemann 11 Sep '20

11 Sep '20

Hi Slawek, we at NETWAYS are running most of our neutron networking on top of midonet and wouldn't be too happy if it gets deprecated and removed. So we would like to take over the maintainer role for this part. Please let me know how to proceed and how we can be onboarded easily. Best regards, Sebastian -- Sebastian Saemann Head of Managed Services NETWAYS Managed Services GmbH | Deutschherrnstr. 15-19 | D-90429 Nuernberg Tel: +49 911 92885-0 | Fax: +49 911 92885-77 CEO: Julian Hein, Bernd Erk | AG Nuernberg HRB25207 https://netways.de | sebastian.saemann(a)netways.de ** NETWAYS Web Services - https://nws.netways.de **

6 17

[cinder][stable] branch freeze for ocata, pike
by Brian Rosmaita 10 Sep '20

10 Sep '20

tl;dr - do not approve any backports to stable/ocata or stable/pike in any Cinder project deliverable stable/ocata has been tagged with ocata-eol in cinder, os-brick, python-cinderclient, and python-brick-cinderclient-ext. Nothing should be merged into stable/ocata in any of these repositories during the interim period before the branches are deleted. stable/pike: the changes discussed in [0] have merged, and I've proposed the pike-eol tags [1]. Nothing should be merged into stable/pike in any of our code repositories from now until the branches are deleted. [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-July/016076.html [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742523/

4 6