April 2025 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[tc][ptg] OpenStack Technical Committee 2025.2 Flamingo PTG summary
by Goutham Pacha Ravi 17 Apr '25

17 Apr '25

Hello Stackers, Here’s a summary of the OpenStack Technical Committee’s discussions at the 2025.2 “Flamingo” Virtual PTG held April 7–11, 2025. Find detailed notes in our discussion etherpad [1] and recordings on YouTube [2]. Feedback is welcome on this mailing list or in OFTC’s `#openstack-tc` IRC channel, perhaps during our weekly meetings [3]. == Topic: TC Retrospective == Discussion: - We reviewed the TC’s effectiveness in addressing issues raised during the cycle, including leadership gaps, licensing concerns, project guide updates, and communication practices. - Fewer teams were leaderless following the 2025.2 election cycle—thanks to better outreach and clearer election guidance. - There was consensus that the TC guideline discouraging bare “recheck” comments and the need to address persistent gate issues is now better understood. - Licensing FAQs [4] appear outdated. We noted that the TC can escalate licensing questions to the OpenInfra Foundation’s Legal team and should monitor the `legal-discuss` list more actively. - Teams encouraging non-core contributors to become PTLs was praised as a way to grow the contributor base through mentorship. Action Items: - Update the Project Team Guide, removing obsolete sections (e.g., sprint design/process). - Update licensing references across the Project Team Guide and TC governance site. - Encourage public communication, regular meetings, and the use of team-specific IRC or Matrix channels. == Topic: Goals Retrospective == Discussion: - We reviewed the status of ongoing community-wide goals, including progress, blockers, and next steps. - Migrate CI Jobs to Ubuntu Noble [5] - The goal is complete. Teams should now remove OS version pins in their repositories. - Eventlet Migration [6] - Refer to Hervé’s PTG summary [7] for updates. - Privsep Migration [8] - Progress is slow; some minor activity exists in Gerrit, but tracking doesn’t reflect it. - The Oslo team will de-prioritize removing eventlet from `oslo-rootwrap`, as it’s expected to be retired. - Clear guidance on secure, performant `privsep` usage is needed. - FIPS Compliance [9] - CentOS Stream 10 requires x86_64-v3, unsupported by our nodepool providers. - This hardware/runtime mismatch complicates long-term testing with CS9 or Ubuntu LTS. - Alternatives discussed: Debian, Rocky Linux (but Rocky may inherit CS10's hardware constraints). - Red Hat is evaluating a `paramiko` replacement this cycle. - Consistent and Secure RBAC [10] - Progress tracked [here](https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/rbac-goal-tracking#L14). - Phase 1 (personas + drop system scope): 16 projects complete. - Phase 2 (service role): 3 projects. - Phase 3 (manager role): 3 projects. - Ghanshyam Mann (gmann) continues to chair bi-weekly IRC meetings. Action Items: - Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez (ralonsoh) to send a status update on `privsep` and flag possible `rootwrap` deprecation. - Ade lee (ade_lee) to update FIPS goal status. - SRBAC liaisons must attend bi-weekly meetings and track project progress. - Publish guidance on secure, performant `privsep` usage. == Topic: Revisiting “Unmaintained” Branches == Discussion: - The TC discussed the burden and ambiguity around maintaining aging branches. - Project teams often lack resources or interest to maintain older branches; the Release team has pursued mass EOL as a workaround. - We agreed to reduce scope and prioritize core goals (e.g., eventlet removal, CI stability) rather than preserve old branches without active interest. - TC supports giving `openstack-unmaintained-core` full responsibility for EOL decisions. We may seek volunteers earlier in the branch lifecycle. - Broken jobs in unmaintained branches flood Zuul; fixing in-repo configs may not be viable. OpenDev may opt to ignore failing jobs externally. - There’s an unregistered, unlogged `#openstack-unmaintained` IRC channel on OFTC. Action Items: - Document responsibilities of unmaintained branch liaisons and `openstack-unmaintained-core`. - Propose a new process: `openstack-unmaintained-core` sets deadlines per cycle to solicit maintainers for aging branches. If no one steps up, proceed to EOL. == Topic: TC and Community Leaders Forum == Discussion: - Governance proposal under review to expand the scope of the VMT to cover all OpenStack project teams [11]. - The TC must ensure teams prioritize security. Poor handling of vulnerabilities harms community trust and ethical responsibility. - Ideas were proposed to support the VMT, including a pool of core security contacts from contributing organizations. - Projects were reminded to review community goals and prioritize them. Adding goal timelines and cross-project prioritization was suggested. - Teams should use Stackalytics and Bitergia dashboards to track activity and identify areas needing improvement (e.g., review velocity, core participation). Action Items: - Teams must audit their Launchpad “Bug Sharing” settings and confirm their `coresec` groups contain responsible, active contributors. - PTLs and Security Liaisons should ensure they can manage the `coresec` group or delegate access. - Audit deliverables against [Security Process Requirements][12]. - Benchmark project health using Stackalytics/Bitergia. Reinforce OpenStack code review best practices [13][14]. == Topic: Finding Contributors in Some Projects is Hard == Discussion: - QA, Requirements, and Release Management teams remain understaffed. - Despite upstream investment opportunities for 2025 [15], contributor interest is low. - This is a “Tragedy of the Commons” issue: shared work without clear ownership is often deprioritized. - PTG scheduling didn’t support sufficient cross-project collaboration. - The TC was encouraged to reset perfectionist expectations—approve good-enough changes, and avoid expanding review scope unnecessarily. Action Items: - Explore QA Liaisons: trusted contributors mentored into maintaining QA repos. - Avoid nitpicking or scope creep during code reviews. - Promote and participate in the contributor survey [16]. - Document expectations and best practices in the Project Team Guide. == Topic: Splintered Conversations & Communication Barriers == Discussion: - Operators report more engagement on Reddit, Kubernetes Slack, Discord, etc., than on `openstack-discuss` or OFTC IRC. - Some organizations block Matrix due to regulatory compliance, requiring platforms with retention policies. - The OpenInfra Board will not mandate platforms—projects must choose what suits them. - IRC onboarding is hard for newcomers. - Zuul contributors reported smooth onboarding to Matrix. Its e2e encryption may make it more acceptable for compliance-sensitive orgs. - The conversation continued in the `os-operators` PTG, where there was interest in trying Matrix and Meetpad for better engagement. Action Items: - Explore use of a hosted Matrix homeserver by OpenDev as a short-term workaround for those unable to use IRC. That's a wrap! It was great fun seeing you all at the PTG. I look forward to working on these AIs with you! Thanks, On behalf of the OpenStack TC, Goutham Pacha Ravi (gouthamr) OpenStack TC Chair [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/r.51cb4e74dd9980932d32e9a9f4e8a0ce (OS TC PTG Etherpad) [2] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLhwOhbQKWT7XYzqrx21j1uizxNxnbDf5Q (OS TC PTG Recordings) [3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee (OS TC Weekly Meetings) [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LegalIssuesFAQ (OpenStack Licensing FAQs) [5] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/completed/2025.1/migrate-ci-jobs-… (Migrate to Noble goal) [6] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/selected/remove-eventlet.html (Eventlet removal goal) [7] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack… (Eventlet PTG Summary) [8] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/selected/migrate-to-privsep.html (Privsep migration goal) [9] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/selected/fips.html (FIPS compliance goal) [10] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/selected/consistent-and-secure-rb… (SRBAC goal) [11] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/944817 (TC VMT Resolution) [12] https://security.openstack.org/repos-overseen.html#requirements (Security requirements for OpenStack Projects) [13] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/review-the-openstack-way.html (Code Reviews in the OpenStack Way) [14] https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/quasiblog/code-review-antipatt… (Code Review Antipatterns) [15] https://governance.openstack.org/tc//reference/upstream-investment-opportun… (OpenStack Investment Opportunities) [16] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack… (Bridging the Gap)

1 0

[cinder][PTG] 2025.2 Flamingo PTG summary
by Jon Bernard 17 Apr '25

17 Apr '25

Hello everyone, thanks for a very productive PTG for the Flamingo cycle. Below is a brief summary of the highlights. The raw etherpad notes are here [1] and both the summary and transcribed etherpad notes are captured in out wiki here [2]. # Eventlet Removal This cycle we will try complete the removal of Eventlet from our codebase. We dicussed our current usage, including calls to sleep() and tpool.Proxy(). We agreed to split the work between Eric and me. I hope we can get these patches up and reviewed with time to spare before the release. An idea to revive our fake volume driver was raised to potentially gain greater confidence in high concurrency test configurations. # Testing Volume Replication Although volume replication is support by a few of our in-tree drivers, there are no integration tests that verify correct behaviour in tempest. Discussions on adding tempest tests lead to Liron being interested in driving this effort. Changes will need to be made to devstack-ceph plugin to support deploying multiple ceph clusters, as well as gate configuration to run all of this in a multi-node environment. There are a few important moving pieces which may take some time to sort out, but we agreed to commit to working towards a solution in this cycle. # Follow-up from Epoxy We have a few patch series that we didn't have time to review by the deadline of the Epoxy cycle. Volume type metadata, encryption format, and dm-clone just to name a few. Effort in reviewing and gathering feedback needs to be prioritized in the first half of the cycle to make sure we can confidently land these in Flamingo. # CI status We should review our 3rd party CI instances to make sure they're actually running, running the correct tests in the context of the related change, and reporting results that can be viewed by a gerrit reviewer. It was noted that some of them fall short of some or all of these requirements. It would be helpful to gather a current status so that we can help vendors with awareness. # 2023.2 Final Stable Release On April 30, the stable/2023.2 branch will have it's final release. This will mark the end of cinderlib. We still have a few backports that need reviews currently, see etherpad for details. # Backup Improvements crohmann raised 2 patches that both improve the speed of cinder-backup's startup routine, and decouple a volume's backup status from it's overall status. Eric and Brian agreed to review to help move these patches forward. # RBD Geometry Option We've have an old patch to allow RBD's disk geometry to be configurable. This reportedly improves performance of Windows guests significantly. We agreed to make sure this gets reviewed in this cycle. # Stephen's Patches We have 3 patches carried over from last cycle that need review. These include an OpenAPI series, a patch to map block storage AZs to Compute AZs, and updates to OSC. It would be really nice to get these reviewed in this cycle. # Tobias' Patches We have several patches from Tobias all related to cinder-backup improvements. Including adding support for backup service to os-availability-zone, support for filters in query parameters, the addition of a summary API, and potentially adding a `type` field to the API to open the posibility of support backups types beyond just `full` or `incremental`. [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/apr2025-ptg-cinder [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CinderFlamingoPTGSummary -- Jon

1 0

OpenInfra Summit Europe registration now open
by Jeremy Stanley 17 Apr '25

17 Apr '25

As most of you already know, the OpenInfra Summit Europe this year is October 17-19 at the École Polytechnique Paris-Saclay in France. Registration is now open here: https://summit2025.openinfra.org/ Don't forget, the CFP closes on June 13! If you're planning to submit a talk, there's still time but don't wait too long. For additional info, see this more detailed announcement on the foundation mailing list: https://lists.openinfra.org/archives/list/foundation@lists.openinfra.org/me… -- Jeremy Stanley

1 0

[dev][infra][tact-sig][tc] Image availability in OpenDev
by Jeremy Stanley 17 Apr '25

17 Apr '25

I want to call everyone's attention to an announcement from the OpenDev Collaboratory sysadmins: https://lists.opendev.org/archives/list/service-discuss@lists.opendev.org/t… The quick summary is that help is needed with ongoing maintenance of the following test platform images, or else they may be removed in the not too distant future: * CentOS Stream (x86 and Arm) * Rocky Linux (x86 and Arm) * Ubuntu (Arm only) * Debian (Arm only) In addition, these images have been unmaintained for a long time and can't currently be rebuilt, so without immediate intervention will be removed very soon: * openEuler * Gentoo See the above service-discuss mailing list thread for more details, and follow up there if you can help out. Thanks in advance! -- Jeremy Stanley

1 0

[watcher] 2025.2 Flamingo PTG summary
by Douglas Viroel 17 Apr '25

17 Apr '25

Hello everyone, Last week's PTG had very interesting topics. Thank you all that joined. The Watcher PTG etherpad with all notes is available here: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/apr2025-ptg-watcher Here is a summary of the discussions that we had, including the great cross-project sessions with Telemetry, Horizon and Nova team: Tech Debt (chandankumar/sean-k-mooney) ================================= a) Croniter - Project is being abandoned as per https://pypi.org/project/croniter/#disclaimer - Watcher uses croniter to calculate a new schedule time to run an audit (continuous). It is also used to validate cron like syntax - Agreed: replace croniter with appscheduler's cron methods. - *AI*: (chandankumar) Fix in master branch and backport to 2025.1 b) Support status of Watcher Datasources - Only Gnocchi and Prometheus have CI job running tempest tests (with scenario tests) - Monaska is inactive since 2024.1 - *AI*: (jgilaber) Mark Monasca and Grafana as deprecated, unless someone steps up to maintain them, which should include a minimal CI job running. - *AI*: (dviroel) Document a support matrix between Strategies and Datasources, which ones are production ready or experimental, and testing coverage. c) Eventlet Removal - Team is going to look at how the eventlet is used in Watcher and start a PoC of its removal. - Chandan Kumar and dviroel volunteer to help in this effort. - Planned for 2026.1 cycle. Workflow/API Improvements (amoralej) ============================== a) Actions states - Currently Actions updates from Pending to Succeeded or Failed, but these do not cover some important scenarios - If an Action's pre_conditions fails, the action is set to FAILED, but for some scenarios, it could be just SKIPPED and continue the workflow. - Proposal: New SKIPPED state for action. E.g: In a Nova Migration Action, if the instance doesn't exist in the source host, it can be skipped instead of fail. - Proposal: Users could also manually skip specific actions from an action plan. - A skip_reason field could also be added to document the reason behind the skip: user's request, pre-condition check, etc. - *AI*: (amoralej) Create a spec to describe the proposed changes. b) Meaning of SUCCEEDED state in Action Plan - Currently means that all actions are triggered, even if all of them fail, which can be confusing for users. - Docs mention that SUCCEEDED state means that all actions have been successfully executed. - *AI*: (amoralej) Document the current behavior as a bug (Priority High) - done: https://bugs.launchpad.net/watcher/+bug/2106407 Watcher-Dashboard: Priorities to next release (amoralej) =========================================== a) Add integration/functional tests - Project is missing integration/functional tests and a CI job running against changes in the repo - No general conclusion and we will follow up with Horizon team - *AI*: (chandankumar/rlandy) sync with Horizon team about testing the plugin with horizon. - *AI*: (chandankumar/rlandy) devstack job running on new changes for watcher-dashboard repo. b) Add parameters to Audits - It is missing on the watcher-dashboard side. Without it, it is not possible to define some important parameters. - Should be addressed by a blueprint - Contributors to this feature: chandankumar Watcher cluster model collector improvement ideas (dviroel) ============================================= - Brainstorm ideas to improve watcher collector process, since we still see a lot of issues due to outdated models when running audits - Both scheduled model update and event-based updates are enabled in CI today - It is unknown the current state of event-based updates from Nova notification. Code needs to be reviewed and improvements/fixes can be proposed - e.g: https://bugs.launchpad.net/watcher/+bug/2104220/comments/3 - We need to check if we are processing the right notifications of if is a bug on Nova - Proposal: Refresh the model before running an audit. A rate limit should be considered to avoid too many refreshments. - *AI*: (dviroel) new spec for cluster model refresh, based on audit trigger - *AI:* (dviroel) investigate the processing of nova events in Watcher Watcher and Nova's visible constraints (dviroel) ==================================== - Currently, Watcher can propose solutions that include server migrations that violate some Nova constraints like: scheduler_hints, server_groups, pinned_az, etc. - In Epoxy release, Nova's API was improved to also show scheduler_hints and image_properties, allowing external services, like watcher, to query and use this information when calculating new solutions. - https://docs.openstack.org/releasenotes/nova/2025.1.html#new-features - Proposal: Extend compute instance model to include new properties, which can be retrieved via novaclient. Update strategies to filter invalid migration destinations based on these new properties. - *AI*: (dviroel) Propose a spec to better document the proposal. No API changes are expected here. Replacement for noisy neighbor policy (jgilaber) ==================================== - The existing noisy neighbor strategy is based on L3 Cache metrics, which is not available anymore, since the support for it was dropped from the kernel and from Nova. - In order to keep this strategy, new metrics need to be considered: cpu_steal? io_wait? cache_misses? - *AI*: (jgilaber) Mark the strategy as deprecated during this cycle - *AI*: (TBD) Identify new metrics to be used - *AI*: (TBD) Work on a replacement for the current strategy Host Maintenance strategy new use case (jeno8) ===================================== - New use case for Host Maintenance strategy: instance with ephemeral disks should not be migrated at all. - Spec proposed: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/943873 - New action to stop instances when both live/cold migration are disabled by the user - *AI*: (All) Review the spec and continue with discussion there. Missing Contributor Docs (sean-k-mooney) ================================ - Doc missing: Scope of the project, e.g: https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/project-scope.html - *AI*: (rlandy) Create a scope of the project doc for Watcher - Doc missing: PTL Guide, e.g: https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/ptl-guide.html - *AI*: (TBD) Create a PTL Guide for Watcher project - Document: When to create a spec vs blueprint vs bug - *AI*: (TBD) Create a doc section to describe the process based on what is being modified in the code. Retrospective ========== - The DPL approach seems to be working for Watcher - New core members added: sean-k-mooney, dviroel, marios and chandankumar - We plan to add more cores in the next cycle, based on reviews and engagement. - We plan to remove not active members in the 2 last cycles (starting at 2026.1) - A new datasource was added: Prometheus - Prometheus job now also runs scenario tests, along with Gnocchi. - We triaged all old bugs from launchpad - Needs improvement: - current team is still learning about details in the code, much of the historical knowledge was lost with the previous maintainers - core team still needs to grow - we need to focus on creating stable releases Cross-project session with Horizon team =============================== - Combined session with Telemetry and Horizon team, focused on how to provide a tenant and an admin dashboard to visualize metrics. - Watcher team presented some ideas of new panels for both admin and tenants, and sean-k-mooney raised a discussion about frameworks that can be used to implement them - Use-cases that were discussed: - a) Admin would benefit from a visualization of the infrastructure utilization (real usage metrics), so they can identify bottlenecks and plan optimization - b) A tenant would like to view their workload performance, checking real usage of cpu/ram/disk of instances, to proper adjust their resources allocation. - c) An admin user of watcher service would like to visualize metrics generated by watcher strategies like standard deviation of host metrics. - sean-k-mooney presented an initial PoC on how a Hypervisor Metrics dashboard would look like. - Proposal for next steps: - start a new horizon plugin as an official deliverable of telemetry project - still unclear which framework to use for building charts - dashboard will integrate with Prometheus, as metric store - it is expected that only short term metrics will be supported (7 days) - python-observability-client will be used to query Prometheus Cross-project session with Nova team ============================= - sean-k-mooney led topics on how to evolve Nova to better assist other services, like Watcher, to take actions on instances. The team agreed on a proposal of using the existing metadata API to annotate instance's supported lifecycle operations. This information is very useful to improve Watcher's strategy's algorithms. Some example of instance's metadata could be: - lifecycle:cold-migratable=true|false - ha:maintenance-strategy:in_place|power_off|migrate - It was discussed that Nova could infer which operations are valid or not, based on information like: virt driver, flavor, image properties, etc. This feature was initially named 'instance capabilities' and will require a spec for further discussions. - Another topic of interest, also raised by Sean, was about adding new standard traits to resource providers, like PRESSURE_CPU and PRESSURE_DISK. These traits can be used to weight hosts when placing new VMs. Watcher and the libvirt driver could work on annotating them, but the team generally agreed that the libvirt driver is preferred here. - More info at Nova PTG etherpad [0] and sean's summary blog [1] [0] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/r.bf5f1185e201e31ed8c3adeb45e3cf6d [1] https://www.seanmooney.info/blog/2025.2-ptg/#watcher-topics Please let me know if I missed something. Thanks! -- Douglas Viroel - dviroel

4 7

[ops][sdk] Does anyone rely on the osclient/python-openstackclient container image?
by Stephen Finucane 17 Apr '25

17 Apr '25

o/ The python-openstackclient project has an 'osc-upload-image' job that builds and uploads a Docker image to 'osclient/python-openstackclient' on docker.io [1]. This job has been failing intermittently over recent months due to changes in the docker.io rate limits. At this point, I am inclined to remove the job since the image does not appear to be documented anywhere and I'm not aware of anyone relying on it. Before I do though, I'd like to check if this is the case or if someone is in fact relying on it. If anyone *is* doing so, I'd like suggestions for a different image registry we can use, as well as assistance in updating the jobs to use this image registry. If not, I'll likely push to remove this within the next 2-3 weeks. Cheers, Stephen [1] https://hub.docker.com/r/osclient/python-openstackclient

2 2

Is DHCP relay in Openstack
by Andrei RADU 17 Apr '25

17 Apr '25

Hello, This is my first interaction with Openstck mailinglists so hopefully I am sending this question to the correct place😊 The question is simple: does Openstack(Neutron) natively support DHCP relay? We have currently a (test) deployment using OVS driver but we may think switching to OVN. We would like to use an external DHCP server(BlueCat) that is already handling the rest of our network DHCP. I could not find anything related to this in docs. I found this spec: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron-specs/+/105660 which seems to have been abandoned. I saw they mention the ISC.org dhcp relay tool. I saw it was deprecated in 20222 and not supported anymore and the new product Kea seems to lack the DHCP relay feature. I guess we could search for other solutions(If anyone has experience in this topic I would be grateful) but we would very much prefer a native, integrated solution that would be easy to manage. So is DHCP supported or planned to be supported in the near future? Best Regards, Andrei <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-pictet-group" target="_blank"></a> <a href="https://www.instagram.com/pictetgroup/" target="_blank"></a> <a href="https://twitter.com/PictetGroup" target="_blank"></a> This message is not intended for persons who are citizens of, domiciled or resident in, or entities registered in a country or jurisdiction in which its distribution, publication, provision or use would violate current laws and regulations. The content of this message is confidential and may be read and/or used only by the recipient of this message. For information about personal data protection, please refer to the Pictet Group’s Privacy Notice available at www.pictet.com/privacynotice. If you have received this e-mail message in error, please destroy it and delete it from your computer. The Pictet Group may not be held liable for the use, transmission or treatment of the content of this message. The recipient of this message remains solely liable for any form of reproduction, copying, disclosure, modification and/or publication of the content. No liability whatsoever will be incurred by the Pictet Group. The recipient of this message agrees to comply with the applicable laws and regulations in the jurisdictions where they use the information contained herein.<br>

3 3

[OpenInfra Foundation] VMware to OpenStack Migration Survey
by Jimmy McArthur 16 Apr '25

16 Apr '25

Last year we created the first VMware to OpenStack Migration survey and gained some valuable insight into the state of the market given the Broadcom shakeup. This year, we’re expanding the scope a bit and have added some new questions. I’d greatly appreciate it if you could take a few moments and fill this out if your organization has any business interest in this topic. https://openinfrafoundation.formstack.com/forms/vmware_strategy_survey_nm Please note that there are a couple of opportunities highlighted in the survey: An option to do a customer case study and opting your org in to sharing info with some research firms that have expressed interest in this topic. I am more than happy to answer any questions around the survey and/or data usage! Thanks everyone! Jimmy McArthur OpenInfra Foundation

1 0

[nova][ptg] 2025.2 Flamingo PTG summary
by Rene Ribaud 16 Apr '25

16 Apr '25

Hello everyone, Last week was the PTG—thank you to those who joined! I hope you enjoyed it. I haven’t gathered exact attendance stats, but it seemed that most sessions had at least around 15 participants, with some peaks during the cross-team discussions. If you’d like to take a closer look, here’s the link to the PTG etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/r.bf5f1185e201e31ed8c3adeb45e3cf6d We had a pretty full agenda for Nova, so here’s a summary I’ve tried to keep as short as possible. #### 2025.1 Epoxy Retrospective #### 17 specs were accepted, and 12 implemented — an excellent ratio. This represents a clear improvement over previous cycles. Virtiofs was successfully merged, unblocking other work and boosting contributor motivation. ✅ We agreed to maintain regular status updates via the etherpad and follow up during Nova meetings. API Microversions & Tempest Coverage, several microversions were merged with good structure. However, some schema changes were not reflected in Tempest, causing downstream blockers. Also the updates covered by the microversions were not propagated into the sdk and openstack client. ✅ Ensure client-side features (e.g., server show) are also published and tracked. ✅ Keep microversions isolated and document Tempest implications clearly in specs. ✅ Raise awareness of the tempest-with-latest-microversion job during Nova meetings. ✅ Monitor OpenAPI efforts in Nova, which may allow offloading schema checks from Tempest in the future. Eventlet Removal, progress is behind schedule, especially compared to other projects like Neutron. ✅ Flag this as a priority area for upcoming cycles. Review Process & Tracking, spec review days were difficult to coordinate, and the status etherpad often outdated. ✅ Encourage active contributors to support occasional contributors during review days. ✅ Commit to keeping the etherpad current throughout the cycle. #### 2025.2 Flamingo Planning #### Timeline: Soft spec freeze (no new specs): June 1st Hard spec freeze (M2): July 3rd Feature Freeze (FF): August 28th Final release: late September / early October ✅ We agreed to officially adopt June 1st as the soft freeze date, based on the successful approach in Epoxy. ✅ A spec review day will be scheduled around mid June, these will be scheduled and announced early to ensure participation. ✅ Uggla will update the schedule document with the proposed milestones. #### Upstream Bug Triage #### We acknowledged that active bug triage has slowed down, resulting in a backlog increase (~150 untriaged bugs). There is a consensus that triage remains important to maintain a clear picture of the actual bug landscape. ✅ Trial a new approach: review some untriaged bugs at the end of Nova team meetings. ✅ Process the list by age (starting with the newest or most-voted first). #### Closing Old Bugs #### A proposal was made to bulk-close bugs older than 2 years, with a respectful and explanatory message, aiming to reduce backlog and improve visibility. However, multiple voices expressed strong reservations. ✅Take no action for now. Focus efforts on triaging new bugs first. ✅ If we successfully reduce the number of untriaged new bugs, we can consider scrubbing the bug backlog and possibly closing some of the older ones. #### Preparation for Python 3.13 #### While Python 3.13 is not mandatory for 2025.2, early compatibility work was discussed due to known issues (e.g., eventlet is broken on 3.13, as observed on Ubuntu 25.04) Ubuntu 24.04 and CentOS Stream 10 will stay on 3.12 for their supported lifespans. A non-voting unit test job for Python 3.13 (openstack-tox-py313) has already been added and is currently passing. Introducing a functional job for 3.13 could be a good next step, if resources allow. ✅ Gibi will track this as part of the broader eventlet removal work. #### Confidential Computing Feature Planning #### AMD SEV is already supported in Nova. SEV-ES is implemented in libvirt and work is ongoing in Nova. SEV-SNP is now supported in libvirt (v10.5.0). Work in Nova has not started yet. ✅ Pay closer attention to SEV-ES reviews to help move this forward. ✅ Tkajinam will write a new spec for SEV-SNP. Intel TDX Kernel support is nearly ready (expected in 6.15). Libvirt patches exist, but feature is not yet upstreamed or widely released. ✅ No action agreed yet, as this remains exploratory. Arm CCA No hardware is available yet; earliest expected in April 2027 (Fujitsu Monaka). Support in libvirt, QEMU, and Linux kernel is still under development. ✅ The use case is reasonable, but too early to proceed — we should wait until libvirt and QEMU support is mature. ✅ It would be beneficial to wait for at least one Linux distribution to officially support Arm CCA, allowing real-world testing. ✅ Attestation support for Arm is seen as external to Nova, with only minor flags possibly needed in the guest. #### RDT / MPAM Feature Discussion #### RDT (Intel PQoS) and MPAM (Arm equivalent) aim to mitigate “noisy neighbor” issues by allocating cache/memory bandwidth to VMs. Development has stalled since 2019, primarily due to: - Lower priority for contributors - Lack of customer demand - Infrastructure complexity (NUMA modeling, placement limitations) ✅ r-taketn to reopen and revise the original spec, showing a clear diff to the previous version. ✅ Ensure that abstractions are generic, not tied to proprietary technology, using libvirt + resource classes/traits may provide enough flexibility. #### vTPM Live Migration #### A spec for vTPM live migration was approved in Epoxy: https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/2025.1/approved/vtpm… <https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/2025.1/approved/vtpm…>To support live-migratable vTPM-enabled instances, Barbican secrets used for vTPM need to be owned by Nova, rather than the end user. This shift in ownership allows Nova to access the secret during live migration operations. Opt-in is handled via image property or flavor extra spec, meaning user consent is explicitly required. Current Proposal to enable this workflow: - Castellan should allow per-call configuration for sending the service token (rather than relying on a global all-or-nothing setting). Proposal: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/castellan/+/942015 - If the Nova service token is present, Barbican should set the secret owner to Nova. Proposal: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/barbican/+/942016 This workflow ensures Nova can read/delete the secret during lifecycle operations like migration, without involving the user. A question was raised around possible co-ownership between Nova and the end user (e.g., both having access to the secret). While this may be interesting longer-term, current implementation assumes a single owner. ✅ User and host modes are as described in the spec. For deployment mode, Nova will: - Authenticate to Barbican as itself (using a service token). - Own the vTPM secret it creates — it will be able to create, read, and delete it. - The user will not see or control the secret, including deletion. - The secret will be visible to other members of the Nova service project by default, but this could be restricted in future via Barbican ACLs to limit visibility to Nova only. #### Cloud Hypervisor Integration #### There is an ongoing effort to integrate Cloud Hypervisor into Nova via the Libvirt driver: Spec: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/945549 The current PoC requires only minor changes to work with Libvirt, and the team is ready to present the proposal at the PTG. ✅ We’re happy with the direction the spec is taking. Below are some key highlights regarding the spec. ✅ Clarify platform support (e.g., is libvirt compiled with cloud hypervisor support by default? Is it available in distros?). ✅ Provide a plan for runtime attach of multiple NICs and volumes. ✅ Mark as experimental if cloud hypervisor is not yet in upstream distro packages. ✅ Ensure that the following features are expected to work and covered in the spec: resize, migrate, rebuild, evacuate, snapshot. ✅ Justify raw-only image support, and outline the path to qcow2 compatibility. #### vGPU (mdev) and PCI SR-IOV Topics #### 1. Live-migratable flag handling (physical_network tag) Bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2102161 ✅ We agreed that the current behavior is correct and consistent with the intention: If live_migratable = false → fallback to hotplug during live migration. If live_migratable = true on both source and destination → prefer transparent live migration. ✅ Investigate how Neutron might participate by requesting live-migratable ports. 2. Preemptive live migration failure for non-migratable PCI devices Nova currently checks for migratability during scheduling and conductor phases. There’s a proposal to move these checks earlier, possibly to the API level. Bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2103631 ✅ Confirm with gmann whether a microversion is needed — likely not, as return codes are already supported (202 → 400/409). ✅ Uggla may submit a small spec to formalize this change. ✅ Split the work into two steps: - Fix existing bug (can be backported). - Incrementally move other validations earlier in the flow. 3. PCI SR-IOV: Unify the Live Migration Code Path There’s agreement on the need to reduce technical debt by refactoring the current dual-code-path approach into a unified model for PCI live migration. ✅ A dedicated spec is needed to clarify and unify PCI claiming and allocation. ✅ This refactor should address PCI claiming and allocation, potentially deprecating or replacing move_claim in favor of more robust DB-backed logic. ✅ This effort is directly related to point 1 (migratability awareness) and will help ensure consistent resource management across the codebase. #### SPICE VDI – Next Steps #### There is an ongoing effort to enhance libvirt domain XML configuration for desktop virtualization use cases (e.g. SPICE with USB and sound controllers). Some patches were proposed but not merged in time for Epoxy. Mikal raised the question of whether a new spec would be required in Flamingo, which would be the third iteration of this work. The team also raised concern about the complexity of adding traits (e.g. os-traits) for relatively simple additions, due to the multi-step process involved (traits patch, release, requirements update, etc.). ✅ Proceed with a specless blueprint. ✅ Plan to pull os-traits and os-resource-classes logic into Placement, to simplify the integration process and reduce friction. Link the required Placement version in Nova documentation accordingly. This is a strategic direction, even if some traits might still be shared with Neutron/Cinder. #### Virtiofs Client Support #### The virtiofs server-side support was merged in Epoxy, but SDK and client-side support did not make it in time. The proposal is to merge both patches early in Flamingo and then backport to Epoxy. ✅ No concern with microversion usage here. ✅The ordering of microversion support patches across Nova, SDKs, and clients will be handled by respective owners. ✅ Uggla to track that each new microversion in Nova has a corresponding patch in SDK/client layers. ✅ Not directly related to virtiofs, but the new reset-state confirmation prompt in the client was noted and welcomed. #### One-Time-Use (OTU) Devices #### OTU devices are designed to be consumed once and then unreserved. There is a need to provide practical guidance on handling these cleanly, especially in notification-driven environments. Additionally, there's an important patch related to Placement behavior on over-capacity nodes: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/945465 Placement currently blocks new allocations on over-capacity nodes — even if the new allocation reduces usage. This breaks migration from overloaded hosts. The proposed fix allows allocations that do not worsen (or improve) usage. Note: A similar OTU device handling strategy has been successfully used in Ironic. ✅ Provide an example script or tool for external OTU device cleanup, based on notifications. ✅ Agreement on the proposed Placement fix — it is operator-friendly and resolves real issues in migration workflows. ✅ We likely need to dig deeper into implementation and tooling for broader OTU support. #### Glance cross-project session #### Please look at glance summary. #### Secure RBAC – Finalization Plan #### Tobias raised concerns about incomplete secure RBAC support in Nova, particularly around default roles and policy behavior. Much of the groundwork has been done, but a number of patches still require review and finalization. ✅ Gmann will continue working on the outstanding patches during the Flamingo cycle. The objective is to complete secure RBAC support in Nova as part of this cycle. #### Image Properties Handling – DB Schema & API Response #### The issue arises from discrepancies between image property metadata stored by Nova and what is received from Glance. Nova’s DB schema enforces a 255-character limit on metadata keys and values, which can lead to silent truncation or hard failures (e.g., when prefixing keys like image_ pushes the total length over 255). Nova stopped supporting custom image properties nearly a decade ago, when the system moved to structured objects (ImageMetaProps via OVO). Glance still allows some custom metadata, which may be passed through to Nova. This led to invalid or non-standard keys (e.g., owner_specified.openstack.sha256) being stored or exposed, even though they are not part of Nova’s supported set. Consensus emerged that we are facing two issues: - Nova's API may expose more metadata than it should (from Glance). - Nova stores non-standard or overly long keys/values, resulting in silent truncation or hard DB errors. ✅ Nova should stop storing non-standard image properties altogether. ✅ A cleanup plan should be created to remove existing unused or invalid metadata from Nova's database post-upgrade. ✅ During instance.save(), Nova should identify and delete unused image_* keys from the system metadata table. ✅ We must be cautious to preserve snapshot-related keys that are valid but not part of the base ImageMetaProps. ✅ These changes are considered bugfixes and can proceed without a new spec. #### Eventlet removal #### Please read the excellent blog post series from Gibi here: https://gibizer.github.io/posts/Eventlet-Removal-Flamingo-PTG/ #### Enhanced Granularity and Live Application of QoS #### This was cross team Neutron/Cinder/Nova first topic. Bloomberg folks presented early ideas around making QoS settings more granular and mutable, and potentially applicable to existing ports or VMs, not just at creation time. Nova does not operate on multiple instances at once, which conflicts with some proposed behaviors (e.g., live update of QoS on a network/project level). QoS is currently exposed via flavors in Nova, and is only supported on the frontend for the Libvirt driver. QoS mutability is non-trivial, with implications for scheduling, resource modeling, and placement interactions. The scope is broad and would require cross-project collaboration (Neutron, Cinder, Placement). Use cases and notes from Bloomberg: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/OpenStack_QoS_Feature_Enhancement_Discussion ✅ Use flavor-based modeling for QoS remains the Nova approach. ✅ Nova should not apply policies across many instances simultaneously. ✅ A spec will be required, especially if new APIs or behavior modifications for existing VMs are introduced. The spec should provide concrete use case examples and API design proposals, including expected behavior during lifecycle operations (resize, rebuild, shelve, etc.). ✅ Max bandwidth adjustments may be possible (as they don’t require reservations), but broader mutability is more complex. ✅ Neutron and Cinder raised no objections regarding Bloomberg’s use cases and proposals. However, please look at Neutron and Cinder's respective summaries. #### Moving TAP Device Creation from Libvirt to os-vif #### This change proposes moving the creation of TAP devices from the Libvirt driver into os-vif, making it more consistent and decoupled. However, it introduces upgrade and timing considerations, especially regarding Neutron and OVN behavior. Bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2073254 Patch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/942786 ✅ Neutron team is open to adjusting the timing of the "port ready" event, which could eliminate the need for Nova-side hacks. ✅ Sean will proceed with the patch and verify behavior through CI. #### Instance Annotations, Labels & K8s-Like Semantics #### Sean proposed introducing a mechanism similar to Kubernetes annotations and labels in Nova, to: - Express user intent regarding instance behavior (e.g., "should this instance be migrated?") - Convey lifecycle preferences to external tools like Watcher and Masakari - Expose capabilities or constraints of an instance (e.g., "cannot be shelved because it has a vTPM") Proposed Examples of Instance Annotations: lifecycle:live-migratable=true|false ha:role=primary|secondary These would be: - Set by users (or operators) - Optionally inherited from flavors (but conflicts would raise 400 Bad Request) - Expressed intent only — not enforcement of policy In addition, labels generated by Nova could reflect actual capabilities, like: lifecycle:live-migratable=false if an instance has a PCI device lifecycle:shelvable=false if it uses vTPM ✅ Define a new API to expose capabilities of instances (e.g., “can this instance be live-migrated?”) Values will be derived by Nova based on configuration/hardware and exposed via nova server show. ✅ Sean will create a spec. ✅ Looking at user-defined labels, we eventually considered defining a second API for them to express scheduling/HA preferences. However we decided the current preferred approach is to start with metadata API, and evolve to a first-class model. We may need admin-only metadata (e.g., for HA tooling like Masakari) this has been discussed in Admin-Only Instance Metadata / Annotations later point. ✅ Sean will also create a spec for this. (Sean). #### External Traits and Node Pressure Metrics #### Sean also proposed allowing external systems (e.g., Watcher, telemetry agents) to annotate compute nodes with traits such as memory/cpu/io pressure, based on /proc/pressure. Examples: CUSTOM_MEM_PRESSURE=high EXTERNAL_IO_PRESSURE=moderate ✅ Support a COMPUTE_MEM_PRESSURE-like trait, populated from sysfs as static info (not dynamic). ✅ A weigher could use these traits to influence placement.Default traits list could be configured (e.g., prefer/avoid hosts with certain pressures or hardware features). This approach could evolve into a generic “preferred traits” weigher, similar to Kubernetes taints/tolerations. ✅Sean will create a dedicated spec for this feature. ✅ Sbauza volunteered to help, especially as the work aligns with weigher logic from the previous cycle. #### OpenAPI Schema Integration #### Stephen highlighted that most of the heavy lifting for OpenAPI support is now complete, and the work is down to pure response schema definitions. This effort spans over three cycles now, and it would be valuable to finalize it early in Flamingo. ✅ We'll formalize this work with a blueprint. ✅ The goal is to make early progress in Flamingo, ideally with a dedicated review day. ✅ Stephen is happy to join synchronous review sessions and will coordinate pings for progress. ✅ Masahito volunteered to help with the remaining work. #### OpenStack SDK & Client Workflows #### Stephen raised a few concerns regarding timing mismatches between SDK/OSC freezes and microversion patch merges in Nova. Some microversion support landed too late to be integrated in the SDK before the Epoxy freeze. Patches were sometimes missed due to lack of "depends-on" links or broken initial submissions. ✅ Uggla will follow up and finalize these patches early in the Flamingo cycle. #### Upstream Testing for PCI Passthrough and mdev Devices #### With IGB support merged in Epoxy, and vIOMMU enabled in some Vexxhost workers (thanks to dansmith), the opportunity exists to expand PCI testing upstream in Tempest. This would also benefit testing of one-time-use (OTU) devices. Finalizing mtty testing is a priority, as it helps ensure device support is consistent and regressions (like bug #2098892) are caught early. ✅ Bauzas will lead on wrapping up mtty testing. ✅ Gibi will coordinate with cloud providers to assess Epoxy support and revisit this topic during the next PTG if needed. #### CPU Power Management – Expected Behavior #### Melanie raised questions about inconsistencies between design and implementation in Nova’s CPU power management logic. In particular: - CPUs were being offlined too aggressively, sometimes during reboot or migration operations. - This contradicts the intent that only unassigned or deallocated cores should be powered off. There was confusion between two approaches: - Aggressive power-down of unused CPUs during all idle states (stop, shelve, etc.) - Conservative behavior, powering off cores only when the VM is deleted or migrated away Consensus favored the aggressive-but-safe model: - Power down cores only when not used, e.g., VM is stopped or migrated. - Be cautious not to power off cores prematurely (e.g., during reboot or verify-resize). ✅ Do not rush to power off CPU cores at compute startup or mid-operation. ✅ Revisit the implementation so the resource tracker runs first, and determines actual core assignments before making decisions. #### Live Migration with Encrypted Volumes (Barbican Integration) #### HJ-KIM raised the point that Nova does not currently support live migration of instances using encrypted Cinder volumes managed by Barbican. This is a critical blocker in environments with strict compliance requirements. ✅ This is a parallel issue to vTPM support. We will learn from the vTPM implementation and consider applying similar concepts. ✅ A future solution may involve adjusting how ownership is managed, or providing scoped access via ACLs. ✅ Further discussion/spec work will be needed once an implementation direction is clearer. #### Manila–Nova Cross-Team Integration #### The initial Manila–Nova integration is now merged — thanks to everyone involved! The next step is to: - Add automated testing (currently manual tests only). - Start with a few basic positive and negative test scenarios (create, attach, write, delete; snapshot and restore; rule visibility; restricted deletion; etc.). Additionally, longer-term features and improvements are being considered please look at the etherpad. ✅ We will work on tempest tests. ✅ We will continue enhancing Nova–Manila integration during Flamingo (F) and beyond. ✅ Uggla will submit a spec as needed for land memfd support. #### Provider Traits Management via provider.yaml #### 📌 Spec: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/937587 Problem: Traits defined in provider.yaml are added to Placement but never removed if deleted from the file. ✅ Implement a mechanism where Nova copies the applied file to /var/lib/nova/applied_provider.yaml, and diffs it with the active one on restart. This would allow traits (and possibly other config) to be safely removed. #### Admin-Only Instance Metadata / Annotations #### 📌 Spec: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/939190 Issue: Current instance metadata is user-owned, and shouldn't be used by admins. Proposal: Introduce admin-only annotations (or metadata with ownership tracking), allowing operators to set system-visible metadata without violating user intent. ✅ Introduce a created_by field (similar to locked_by) to track who created metadata: user vs admin. Consider an admin: prefix namespace for admin-controlled keys (applied to annotations or metadata). Implementation requires a DB change and a nova-spec. Note: This aligns well with broader annotation work already discussed in this cycle. #### delete_on_terminate for Ports (Server Create / Network Attach APIs) #### 📌 Related discussion: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/936990 Background: This was discussed in past PTGs. Currently, delete_on_terminate can't be updated dynamically across instance lifetime. ✅ A spec with a working PoC will help clarify the desired behavior and unblock the discussion. Long-term solution may require storing this flag in Neutron as a port property (rather than Nova-specific DB). #### Graceful Shutdown of Nova Compute Services #### 📌 Spec: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/937185 Challenge: Need a mechanism to drain compute nodes gracefully before shutdown, without interrupting active workloads or migrations. Graceful shutdown is tricky in the presence of live migrations. Ideas include: - Temporary “maintenance mode” (block write requests). - Group-level compute draining. ✅ The topic is important but not urgent — bandwidth is limited. Note: Eventlet removal may simplify implementing this. ✅ Please report concrete bugs so we understand the blockers. ✅ A nova-spec with PoC would help drive the conversation. #### Libvirt/QEMU Attributes via Flavor Extra Specs #### Target: Advanced tuning of I/O performance via iothreads and virtqueue mapping, based on: https://developers.redhat.com/articles/2024/09/05/scaling-virtio-blk-disk-i… ✅ Introduce new flavor extra specs such as: - hw:io_threads=4 - hw:blk_multiqueue=2 These can be added to both flavor and image properties. ✅ A nova-spec should be written to document naming and semantics. #### Dynamic Modification of libvirt Domain XML (Hook Proposal) #### oVirt allows for plugins to alter the libvirt domain XML just before instance launch (via VDSM hooks). Nova does not offer a mechanism to intercept or modify the domain XML, and the design explicitly avoids this. The desired use case involves injecting configuration that libvirt cannot currently represent, for example, enabling multiuser SPICE consoles. ✅ This proposal is explicitly rejected. ✅ Nova will not support hook points for permuting libvirt XML. ✅ Operators may use out-of-band libvirt/qemu hooks at their own risk, but should not expect upstream support or stability guarantees. #### Revisiting the "No More API Proxies" Rule #### Masahito proposed allowing users to filter instances via API based on related service data, such as network_id. ✅ The "no API proxy" rule remains, but with pragmatic exceptions: - Filtering is acceptable if the data exists in Nova’s DB (e.g., network ID, image ID). - No cross-service REST calls allowed (e.g., Neutron QoS types still out of scope). - Filtering by network_id in nova list is reasonable and can proceed. ✅ Masahito will provide a spec. #### OVN Migration & Port Setup Timing #### 📌 Context: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2073254 In OVN-based deployments, Neutron signals the network-plugged event too early, before the port is fully set up. This causes issues in live migration, especially under load. ✅ Nova already supports waiting on the network-plugged event. OVN in Ubuntu Noble should behave properly. A proposal to improve timing in Neutron was discussed (Neutron to wait for port claim in southbound DB). Nova might support this via a Neutron port hint that triggers tap interface creation earlier during migration (pre-live-migration). ✅ Next step: open an RFE bug in Neutron. If accepted, a Nova spec may be needed. #### Blocking API Threads During Volume Attachments #### 📌 Context: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1930406 Volume attachment RPC calls block API workers in uWSGI, leading to starvation when multiple attachments are made in parallel. ✅ Volume/interface attachments should become async, reducing API lock contention. Fix is non-trivial and will require a microversion. In the meantime, operators may tune uWSGI workers/threads or serialize attachment calls. #### Inventory Update Failure – DISK_GB Bug #### 📌 Bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2093869 When local storage becomes temporarily unavailable (e.g., Ceph down), Nova sends total=0 for DISK_GB, which Placement rejects if allocations exist. ✅ The real fix is to restore the storage backend. Nova should improve error handling/logging, but should not shut down the compute service. #### Security Group Name Conflict Bug #### 📌 Bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2105896 When multiple security groups share the same name (via Neutron RBAC), instance builds can fail due to incorrect duplicate detection logic. ✅ The issue was fixed in: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/946079 ✅ Fix will be reviewed and backported to Epoxy. If you've read this far — thank you! 🙏 If you spot any mistakes or missing points, please don't hesitate to let me know. Best regards. René.

2 1

[manila] 2025.2 Flamingo PTG summary
by Carlos Silva 16 Apr '25

16 Apr '25

Hello Zorillas and interested stackers, Last week's PTG had plenty of topics and good takeaways. In case you would like to watch any of the discussions, please take a look at the videos in the OpenStack Manila Youtube channel [0]. The PTG etherpad has all of the notes we took [9]. Here is a summary of the discussions grouped by each topic: Retrospective ========== Highlights ------------- Mid cycle alongside feature proposal freeze provided a good opportunity for us to have collaborative review sessions and move faster on reviews. Two bugsquashes had a good impact on the bug backlog and the bug trend was more positive on this cycle, despite the numbers growing due to low-hanging-fruits we started reporting. Internships with City University of Seattle, Valencia College and North Dakota State University - they are definitely helping with progress on manila-ui and OpenAPI. We will continue the effort. We would like to speed up reviews and improve our metrics [1] on how long changes are open before being merged. Review dashboards can help and we can work with our reviewers to have a more disciplined approach on reviews. Broken third party CI systems currently mean that we have little testing. We need to rely on the authors' or their peers to test and ensure that a feature is working. We will look into documenting CI setup procedures and gather thoughts from maintainers. New API Features should be tested as early as possible to ensure it won't break any workflows. Our contributor documentation will be updated with extra guidelines. AIs: (carloss) Encourage Bug Czar candidates and bring this up more often in the manila weekly meetings (carloss) Encourage spec authors to schedule a meeting to discuss the spec to speed up the review process. (carloss) include iCal with event announcements (bugsquash / mid cycle) (gouthamr) Creating a review dashboard (carloss) Record "expert seminars" on FAQs: it would be great to have some videos documenting how-tos in OpenStack and help people to unblock themselves when they are hitting common openstack-developer issues: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/manila-howcasts (carloss) communicate a deadline for the manila CLI -> OSC documentation changes. The work with our interns should go until FPF. It needs to be done before the client release, when we are planning to drop the manilaclient support. ashrodri offered help to get it completed after we come to the FPF deadline. (carloss) We should update these docs and mention that first party driver implementations should be done for features and be more strict about the testing requirements. All things CephFS [2] ================ Deprecation of standalone NFS-Ganesha ------------------------------------------------------- We added a warning in Dalmatian, deferred plans to deprecate based on community feedback. Our plan is to remove it in the 2026.1 release. There is a suggested update procedure, please reach out in case there are questions. AI: (carloss) send a reminder email in this cycle to incentivize people to move to clustered NFS Supporting NFSv3 for Windows workloads -------------------------------------------------------- manila-tempest-plugin now supports multiple NFS protocol versions in one of the scenario tests. As soon as we get the build, we will update the CephFS NFS job to run tests for NFSv3 as well. Testing and stabilization -------------------------------- Bumped Ceph version in the CI jobs to Reef in Antelope, Bobcat, Caracal, Dalmatian. We are starting to test with Ceph Squid; we intend to test with Squid on "master" and "stable/2025.1" (epoxy) branches. A couple of Ceph and NFS-Ganesha issues are impacting us at the moment [4] [5] [6] and we managed to find the workaround for some. We needed to stop testing with ingress daemon at the moment and we will get back to testing as soon as the fix is out. Manage unmanage of shares and snapshots ----------------------------------------------------------- Feature is merged and working and we are going to backfill tempest test patches AI: (carloss) will propose a new job variant to allow testing this feature. Plans for 2025.2 Flamingo ----------------------------------- Investigate support for SMB/CIFS Ceph-NFS QoS: we will follow the implementation of this feature in NFS Ganesha and start discussing and drafting the Manila implementation when the code is merged in Ganesha upstream. Out of place restores and backup enhancements [7] ======================================== CERN is pursuing a backup backend with their C-Back tool. Currently Manila backups can be restored back to the same share; there are some problems with such approach when the source share backend is down and to prevent browse by restore behavior. Zachary Goggins (za) proposed a specification, and plans to work on it during the Flamingo Cycle. The share backups feature also needs some enhancements like a get progress and get restore progress actions. Zach plans to make it part of the implementation. We agreed that a backup resource should have a new "state" attribute, instead of only relying on the status in order to have well defined backup states. AI: (za) update the out of place restore spec. Tech debt ======= Container driver failures -------------------------------- The container driver tempest tests are perma-failing right now. We seem to have a problem with RBAC and pre-provisioned tempest credentials. AIs: (carloss) Report a tempest bug to track the issues; (gouthamr) will propose a change to switch back to using dynamic credentials in our testing. DockerHub rate limits ----------------------------- We are only building an image in manila-image-elements. It's more pulls than pushes. Pushes happen very rarely. The kolla team has moved away from DockerHub as well. Zach offered help in case we need another approach for registry. CERN has its own tool. AI: we will look into moving to quay.io "manila" CLI removal ---------------------------- We added the deprecation warning 6 releases ago and we should proceed with the removal. We will need an additional push to update all of our documentation examples and move to keystoneauth. We need more functional test coverage and we should have a hackathon just as we did some years ago. AI: carloss will schedule a hackathon for enabling more tests and send the removal email to openstack-discuss. We are targeting the removal to 2025.2 Flamingo. CI and testing ------------------ ZFSOnLinux job left on jammy: We created a bug for it and we can use it for tracking. IPv6 testing: The BGP software we were using (quagga) is now deprecated and everything was migrated to FRR. We will need help to fix it as unfortunately, things didn't have a 1x1 translation between the libraries. If someone has experience on this, it would be nice to collaborate to get this fixed. API ---- We are going to stop testing the v1 API and stop deploying it on DevStack test jobs. We'll update the install guide as well that we've stopped supporting it. It was deprecated in 2015 ("Liberty" release). That's a good code cleanup opportunity. V2 is an extension of v1 with microversions. If we stop supporting it, who is affected? Mostly people that have automations using it. What's the impact on manila-tempest-plugin? We have v1 and v2 tests. We have a lot of coverage for v2. If you don't have the v1 API in the cloud, the tests refuse to run. We will need to fix it. AIs: Work on the removal patches during the 2025.2 Flamingo release; (carloss) will send an announcement email to the ML, including operators tag. Manila UI ------------- We have been making progress in the Manila UI feature gap. Currently working on manage/unmanage share servers, manage share with dhss=true, filtering user messages on date, updating quotas table. Share limits view broke some time ago, code lives in horizon. We hit some issues using horizon's tox "runserver" environment, apparently more people ran into the same issue. We will talk to other impacted parties and check how to overcome this issue. AI: (carloss) will reach out to the horizon team and ask how we can re-introduce Manila limits to the overview tab. Enable share encryption at-rest (back-end) with secret refs stored on Barbican/Castellan. [8] ===================================================================== We merged a specification some time ago with an implementation architecture. That spec contemplated both Share encryption and Share server encryption. NetApp is now planning to work only on share server encryption. Encryption can be disabled per share, but shares exported via a share server cannot have a separate encryption key on ONTAP. We reached an agreement that when a new share creation is triggered, if there isn't a share server matching the provided key, a new share server will need to be spawned. We also agreed that we should allow using names for the secret reference for better user experience. 2025.2 Flamingo is the target release. AIs: (kpdev/Sai) The spec will be updated and only the DHSS=True scenario will be documented; The manila team will review the spec as soon as it is proposed Replication Improvements ==================== Back when we implemented replication, we didn't account for specific configurations that the storage backends can have, for example whether the backend could support zero RPO technologies or not. Zero RPO is is an important feature that allows data to be written simultaneously between the share and its replicas. We agreed that the way we should send the information to the backend is through a backend specific share type extra spec. Administrators will be able to define it in the share type and the backend will pick it up. Operator concerns / questions ======================= Where to put parameters that change behaviour only of one protocol (NFS in this case)? We agreed that we should have write once type of metadata and not allow the metadata to be updated afterwards. A configuration option can be introduced for this where the operator can determine what metadata will not be updated. AI: carthaca will propose a lite-spec for this Lustre FS Support for HPC Use Cases in OpenStack Is there any possibility for OpenStack to officially integrate or support parallel file systems like Lustre, either through Manila or other components? We've heard in the past as a request from the scientific-sig group. Building a driver should be straightforward and it does not necessarily need to be in-tree, and it would be easier to maintain. This is a very good use case. This discussion will continue with the scientific-sig group. Replica / Snapshot Retention / Expiration Policy While replicas in Manila are designed to be continuously in sync with the active share, certain use cases — such as disaster recovery (DR) replicas or manually created replicas that are no longer needed — could benefit from lifecycle management. Replicas are continuously synced with the source share, so if they're "unused", they're there for some reason is the assumption. We had a spec a while ago about automating snapshots (creation and deletion) on schedule. It would be preferable that an external automation tool is used to achieve such behavior. Maybe openstack/mistral can be a good approach (Support for manila snapshots already exists on Mistral) Affinity/Anti-affinity spec updates ========================= This feature allows users to create share groups with affinity policies, which determine the affinity relationship between shares within the group. There was an open question about strategies of locking. We came to an agreement that we can use tooz, database or oslo. AI: (chuanm) will update the spec. Force deleting subnets ================= This is a feature that follows the ability to add multiple subnets to a share server. We should also be able to remove them. This spec is under review. We agreed that we should also implement the "check" mechanism before deleting the subnet. AIs: (sylvanld) will update the spec Eventlet removal ============= Need to remove wsgi uses, use oslo service's new Threading based backend instead for the ProcessLauncher, periodic tasks. Neutron is doing some work around periodic tasks and we can benefit from their learning. AI: Work on this in Flamingo, aiming for completion in 2026.1 cycle. Manila/Nova Cross-project session: VirtioFS ================================= VirtioFS implementation is now complete and we are looking at the next steps. We currently don't have CI testing the feature and the Manila team is planning to work on it during the 2025.2 Flamingo release. The nova team intends to drive the remaining SDK and OSC patches to completion during the 2025.2 Flamingo release. We also discussed some possible enhancements: mem_fs support, online attach and detach and live migration. These will take some time and the Nova team will work on such features gradually. AIs: (carloss) will share the test scenarios with the Nova team and ask for reviews and the Manila team will work on the implementation of the tests. (rribaud) will work on the remaining SDK patch and work on mem_fd support. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLXkBRhViS0&list=PLnpzT0InFrqADxXi_dtPqfWLt… [1] https://openstack.biterg.io/app/dashboards#/view/Gerrit-Backlog?_g=(filters…:'Gerrit%20Backlog%20panel%20by%20Bitergia. ',filters:!(('$state':(store:appState),meta:(alias:'Changesets%20Only',disabled:!f,index:gerrit,key:type,negate:!f,params:(query:changeset),type:phrase),query:(match:(type:(query:changeset,type:phrase)))),('$state':(store:appState),meta:(alias:Bots,disabled:!f,index:gerrit,key:author_bot,negate:!t,params:(query:!t),type:phrase),query:(match:(author_bot:(query:!t,type:phrase)))),('$state':(store:appState),meta:(alias:!n,disabled:!f,index:gerrit,key:project,negate:!f,params:(query:manila),type:phrase),query:(match_phrase:(project:manila)))),fullScreenMode:!f,options:(darkTheme:!f,useMargins:!t),query:(language:lucene,query:(query_string:(analyze_wildcard:!t,default_field:'*',query:'*',time_zone:Europe%2FMadrid))),timeRestore:!f,title:'Gerrit%20Backlog',viewMode:view) [2] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/flamingo-ptg-manila-cephfs [3] https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/2049538 [4] https://github.com/nfs-ganesha/nfs-ganesha/issues/1227 [5] https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/69214 [6] https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/67323 [7] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/manila-specs/+/942694 [8] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/share-encryption-with-barbican-secret-ref [9] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/flamingo-ptg-manila Thank you everyone that participated on the PTG! Best regards, carloss

1 0