June 2021 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[cinder] festival of XS reviews 18 June 2021
by Brian Rosmaita 16 Jun '21

16 Jun '21

Hello Cinder community members, This is a reminder that the most recent edition of the Cinder Festival of XS Reviews will be held at the end of this week on Friday 18 June. who: Everyone! what: The Cinder Festival of XS Reviews when: Friday 18 June 2021 from 1400-1600 UTC where: https://meetpad.opendev.org/cinder-festival-of-reviews This recurring meeting can be placed on your calendar by using this handy ICS file: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/calendars/cinder-festival-of-reviews.ics See you there! brian

1 0

[cinder] revert volume to snapshot
by Boxiang Zhu 16 Jun '21

16 Jun '21

Hi, There is a restful api[1] to revert volume to snapshot. But the description means we can only use this api to revert volume to its latest snapshot. Are some drivers limited to rolling back only to the latest snapshot? Or just nobody helps to improve the api to revert volume to any snapshots of the volume? [1] https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/block-storage/v3/index.html?expanded=rev… Thanks, Boxiang

3 3

[all] CRITICAL: Upcoming changes to the OpenStack Community IRC this weekend
by Ghanshyam Mann 15 Jun '21

15 Jun '21

Greetings contributors & community members! With recent events, the Technical Committee held an emergency meeting today (Wednesday, May 26th, 2021) regarding Freenode IRC and what our decision would be [1]. Earlier in the week, the consensus amongst the TC was to gather more information from the individual projects, and make a decision from there[2]. With #rdo, #ubuntu, and #wikipedia having been hijacked, the consensus amongst the TC and the community members who were able to attend the meeting was to move away from Freenode as soon as possible. The TC agreed that this move away from Freenode needs to be a community-wide move to the same, new IRC network for all projects to avoid splintering of the community. As has been long-planned in the event of a contingency, we will be moving to OFTC. We recognize this is a contentious topic, and ultimately we seek to ensure community continuity before evolution to something beyond IRC, as many have expressed interest in doing via Mailing List discussions. At this point, we had to make a decision to solve the immediate problem in the simplest and most expedient way possible, so this is that announcement. We welcome continued discussion about future alternatives on the other threads. With this in mind, we suggest the following steps. Everyone: ======= 1. Do NOT change any channel topics to represent this change. This is likely to result in the channel being taken over by Freenode and will disrupt communications within our community. 2. Register your nicknames on OFTC [3][4] 3. Be *prepared* to join your channels on OFTC[4]. The OpenStack community channels have already been registered on OFTC and await you. 4. Continue to use Freenode for OpenStack discussions until the bots have been moved and the official cut-over takes place this coming weekend. We anticipate using OFTC starting Monday, May 31st. Projects/Project Leaders: ==================== 1. Projects should work to get a few volunteers to staff their project channels on Freenode, for the near future to help redirect people to OFTC. This should occur via private messages to avoid a ban. 2. Continue to hold project meetings on Freenode until the bots are enabled on OFTC. 3. Update project wikis/documentation with the new IRC network information. We ask that you consider referring to the central contributor guide[5]. 4. The TC is asking that projects take advantage of this time of change to consider moving project meetings from the #openstack-meeting* channels to their project channel. 5. Please avoid discussing the move to OFTC in Freenode channels as this may also trigger a takeover of the channel. We are working on getting our bots over to OFTC, and they will be moved over the weekend. Starting Monday May 31, the bots will be on OFTC. Communication regarding this migration will take place on OFTC[4] in #openstack-dev, and we're working on updating the contributor guide[5] to reflect this migration. Sincerely, The OpenStack TC and community leaders who came together to agree on a path forward. [1]: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openstack-irc [2]: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/feedback-on-freenode [3]: https://www.oftc.net/Services/#register-your-account [4]: https://www.oftc.net/ [5]: https://docs.openstack.org/contributors/common/irc.html

3 6

Re: 3rd party CI failures with devstack 'master' using devstack-gate
by Katari Kumar 15 Jun '21

15 Jun '21

6 8

[nova] GPU VMs using MIG?
by António Paulo 15 Jun '21

15 Jun '21

Hi! Has anyone looked into instancing VMs with NVIDIA's Multi-Instance GPU (MIG) devices [1] without having to rely on vGPUs? Unfortunately, NVIDIA vGPUs lack tracing and profiling support that our users need. I could not find anything specific to MIG in the OpenStack docs but I was wondering if doing PCI passthrough [2] of MIG devices is an option that someone has seen or tested? Maybe some massaging to expose the MIG as a Linux device is required [3]? Cheers, António [1] https://docs.nvidia.com/datacenter/tesla/mig-user-guide/ [2] https://docs.openstack.org/nova/pike/admin/pci-passthrough.html [3] https://docs.nvidia.com/datacenter/tesla/mig-user-guide/#device-nodes

2 2

[neutron][nova][placement] bug 1926693: What would be the reasonable solution ?
by Takashi Kajinami 15 Jun '21

15 Jun '21

Hi All, I've been working on bug 1926693[1], and am lost about the reasonable solutions we expect. Ideally I'd need to bring this topic in the team meeting but because of the timezone gap and complicated background, I'd like to gather some feedback in ml first. [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1926693 TL;DR Which one(or ones) would be reasonable solutions for this issue ? (1) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/763563 (2) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/788893 (3) Implement something different The issue I reported in the bug is that there is an inconsistency between nova and neutron about the way to determine a hypervisor name. Currently neutron uses socket.gethostname() (which always returns shortname) to determine a hypervisor name to search the corresponding resource provider. On the other hand, nova uses libvirt's getHostname function (if libvirt driver is used) which returns a canonical name. Canonical name can be shortname or FQDN (*1) and if FQDN is used then neutron and nova never agree. (*1) IMO this is likely to happen in real deployments. For example, TripelO uses FQDN for canonical names. Neutron already provides the resource_provider_defauly_hypervisors option to override a hypervisor name used. However because this option accepts a map between interface and hypervisor, setting this parameter requires very redundant description especially when a compute node has multiple interfaces/bridges. The following example shows how redundant the current requirement is. ~~~ [OVS] resource_provider_bandwidths=br-data1:1024:1024,br-data2:1024:1024,\ br-data3:1024,1024,br-data4,1024:1024 resource_provider_hypervisors=br-data1:compute0.mydomain,br-data2:\ compute0.mydomain,br-data3:compute0.mydomain,br-data4:compute0.mydomain ~~~ I've submitted a change to propose a new single parameter to override the base hypervisor name but this is currently -2ed, mainly because I lacked analysis about the root cause of mismatch when I proposed this. (1) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/763563 On the other hand, I submitted a different change to neutron which implements the logic to get a hypervisor name which is fully compatible with libvirt. While this would save users from even overriding hypervisor names, I'm aware that this might break the other virt driver which depends on a different logic to generate a hypervisor name. IMO the patch is still useful considering the libvirt driver would be the most popular option now, but I'm not fully aware of the impact on the other drivers, especially because I don't know which virt driver would support the minimum QoS feature now. (2) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/788893/ In the review of (2), Sean mentioned implementing a logic to determine an appropriate resource provider(3) even if there is a mismatch about host name format, but I'm not sure how I would implement that, tbh. My current thought is to merge (1) as a quick solution first, and discuss whether we should merge (2), but I'd like to ask for some feedback about this plan (like we should NOT merge (2)). I'd appreciate your thoughts about this $topic. Thank you, Takashi

5 13

Missing dependency on librte_xxxx when installing openstack-nova-scheduler
by Pete Zhang 14 Jun '21

14 Jun '21

Julie, The original email is too long and requires moderator approval. So I have a new email thread instead. The openstack-vswitch is required (>=11.0.0 < 12.0.0) by openstack-neutron (v15.0.0, from openstack-release-train, the release we chose). I downloaded openstack-vswitch-11.0.0 from https://forge.puppet.com/modules/openstack/vswitch/11.0.0. Where I can download the missing *librte and its dependencies*? I don't think we have a yum-repo for Centos Extra so I might need to have those dependencies downloaded as well. Thanks a lot! Pete -- <https://smart.salesforce.com/sig/peiyong.zhang//us_mb/default/link.html>

3 5

[openstack-helm] No meeting tomorrow
by Gage Hugo 14 Jun '21

14 Jun '21

Hey team, Since there are no agenda items [0] for the IRC meeting tomorrow, the meeting is cancelled. Our next meeting will be June 22nd. Thanks [0] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openstack-helm-weekly-meeting

1 0

[Interop] co-chair requirement
by Arkady Kanevsky 14 Jun '21

14 Jun '21

team, after discussing with a few board members I think we should drop the requirement that one of the co-chairs of the Interop WG is from the OIF board. Are you comfortable with this? Thanks, -- Arkady Kanevsky, Ph.D. Phone: 972 707-6456 Corporate Phone: 919 729-5744 ext. 8176456

1 0

[all] Naming Poll for my Y Release Name Vote
by Jay Bryant 14 Jun '21

14 Jun '21

All, As I reviewed the excellent list of names for the 'Y' release I had a hard time choosing. This inspired me to create a poll to get the community's feedback on how you all would like me to vote as a member of the Technical Committee. To cast your vote please visit: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/RHR3NCY Happy voting! Jay (jungleboyj)

2 1