May 2025 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[nova] Information Sharing for Arm CCA Feature (Following 4/8 PTG)
by taketani.ryo＠fujitsu.com 14 Jul '25

14 Jul '25

Thank you for the productive discussion about Arm CCA feature [1] at the PTG on April 8th. > The use case for Arm CCA looks ok. But it is a bit early. It is wise to wait at least libvirt / qemu release to have a "stable" code. > We may want to have a OS distribution version (such as Ubuntu XX.YY) which supports Arm CCA so that users can actually use/test the feature The above information is quoted from the PTG Etherpad [2](L316) summary. I'd like to follow up on these points. I'd like to share relevant information about Arm CCA surrounding components (libvirt, QEMU, OS Distributions(e.g., Ubuntu xx.xx), hardware) as it becomes available, and proceed with the discussion step by step.. I'm starting with this email, but if there's a more appropriate method for sharing this type of information, please let me know. Here's the Arm CCA software components information I can share at this time: * Linux Kernel: The roadmap is outlined on the fifth page of the third attachment in this link [3]. The initial commits I've proposed to OpenStack are focused on RMM 1.0. KVM host support for RMM 1.0 will be available in H2 2025. * QEMU Upstream Status: The development is in-progress, awaiting the Linux Kernel merge * libvirt Upstream Status: The development is in-progress, awaiting the QEMU merge * OS Distribution Support: The road map is not clear now > We may want to have a OS distribution version (such as Ubuntu XX.YY) which supports Arm CCA so that users can actually use/test the feature I have a question regarding the above. For design discussions leading to spec approval, I understand that upstream QEMU/libvirt stable release is necessary. Is a specific OS distribution release (e.g., Ubuntu xx.xx) also required for spec approval? [1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/938276 [2] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-2025.2-ptg [3] https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/archives/list/tsc@lists.trustedfirmware.o… Regards, Ryo Taketani

3 11

[skyline] Request to extend core reviewers team
by Vladimir Kozhukalov 09 Jul '25

09 Jul '25

Hi team, The Skyline project seems to be interesting for many users but the review is slow at the moment. Maybe we could call for more volunteers who are able to spend some of their time for review and extend the project core reviewers team. Opinions are welcome. -- Best regards, Kozhukalov Vladimir

3 2

[i18n][infra][horizon] Zanata translation job failures after Python 3.8 deprecation
by Ian Y. Choi 09 Jul '25

09 Jul '25

Hi all, During last week's PTG, the I18n SIG identified Zanata translation job failures for Horizon (and likely related plugins). The root cause appears to be Python 3.8 deprecation on Horizon [1]. Failed jobs have been observed on Zuul [2], and translation proposals were made on Gerrit [3]. Since translation sync on Horizon stable branches is functioning correctly, the error message seems to be related to Python 3.8 deprecation: ERROR: Cannot install -r doc/requirements.txt (line 3) due to conflicting package version dependencies. To address this, I'd like to raise two points: 1/ To resolve the issue, would you support updating translation sync jobs with Bionic-based Zuul jobs by either upgrading to Jammy or modifying the Bionic image to support Python >3.8? 2/ At least me from I18n SIG acknowledges that recognizing these translation job errors was delayed. Moving forward, would it be beneficial to implement periodic (e.g., monthly) reporting on translation job successes and failures? Thank you, /Ian [1] https://docs.openstack.org/releasenotes/horizon/2024.2.html#upgrade-notes [2] https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?job_name=propose-translation-up… [3] https://review.opendev.org/q/owner:proposal-bot+project:openstack/horizon+b…

2 3

Problems with the Placement service
by Ron Gage 24 Jun '25

24 Jun '25

5 7

[horizon] Changing the Term “Instance” to “Server” for improved clarity and consistency
by Dmitriy Chubinidze 11 Jun '25

11 Jun '25

Propose changing the term "Instance" to "Server" ( "Instances" to "Servers") in the platform’s user interface. This update will be aiming to improve clarity for users, align with industry terminology, and create a more intuitive experience. "Server" is a more commonly understood term than "Instance", especially for users who are not deeply familiar with cloud computing. Major platforms like AWS and Azure often use "Server" in their UI, even when referring to virtual instances. Adopting this term will make OpenStack easier to use and understand. This change will affect only the visual elements — such as UI labels, menus, and documentation. The underlying code, APIs, and data structures using the term instance will remain unchanged. This ensures there is no impact on functionality or development processes. We are open to feedback and discussion on this proposal.

7 8

[designate] Support for quorum queues
by Thomas Goirand 06 Jun '25

06 Jun '25

Hi, When setting-up Designate with quorum queues, when designate-central starts, I get: Queue.declare: (406) PRECONDITION_FAILED - invalid property 'non-durable' for queue 'central' in vhost '/' Does Designate support quorum queues? If so, how com it's trying to set 'non-durable', which doesn't exist as attribute, at least with RabbitMQ 4.0.5? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)

6 6

[neutron] Approach to a spec for OVN BGP integration (RFE 2111276)
by Frode Nordahl 04 Jun '25

04 Jun '25

Hello, Jakub, Thank you for filing the RFE for Neutron support for OVN native support for route exchange, which includes BGP. We appear to have a common goal of making use of this with OpenStack, and we have time set aside this cycle to work towards this goal. Communication through IRC and e-mail often has limited bandwidth, and I wonder if you would be interested in participating in a A/V sync on some cadence to get us off the ground with the initial spec work. We have good experience with how the core OVN A/V sync is organized and we could do something similar for this. WDYT? -- Frode Nordahl

6 9

[cinder]How do I configure Cinder to recognize free space in the data pool when using a Ceph Erasure Coded Pool?
by Yuta Kambe (Fujitsu) 03 Jun '25

03 Jun '25

Hi everyone, I'm using a Ceph Erasure Coded pool as the backend for OpenStack Cinder. I've created a replicated pool (volumes_meta) for metadata and an erasure-coded pool (volumes_data) for data, following the documentation here: https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/rados/operations/erasure-code/ When I set rbd_pool to volumes_meta in cinder.conf, I receive an "Insufficient free virtual space" error, even though volumes_data has ample free space. This is because Cinder is calculating free space based on the metadata pool. When rbd_pool is set to volumes_data, Cinder correctly calculates free space based on the data pool. However, I then encounter an "RBD operation not supported" error during volume creation. I need Cinder to recognize the free space available in volumes_data while avoiding the "RBD operation not supported" error. I'm unsure how to configure this correctly and would appreciate any advice. The following is supplemental information. cinder.conf is: [ceph] volume_driver = cinder.volume.drivers.rbd.RBDDriver volume_backend_name = ceph rbd_pool = volumes_meta rbd_ceph_conf = /etc/ceph/ceph.conf rbd_flatten_volume_from_snapshot = false rbd_max_clone_depth = 5 rbd_store_chunk_size = 4 rados_connect_timeout = -1 rbd_user = cinder rbd_secret_uuid = <uuid> For example, if the pool usage is as follows, Cinder gets 1.6TiB as the pool free space: $ ceph df --- POOLS --- POOL ID PGS STORED OBJECTS USED %USED MAX AVAIL volumes_meta 4 32 40 KiB 24 189 KiB 0 1.6 TiB volumes_data 7 32 61 GiB 15.67k 92 GiB 2.80 2.1 TiB $ cinder get-pools --detail +-----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Property | Value | +-----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | allocated_capacity_gb | 523 | | backend_state | up | | driver_version | 1.3.0 | | filter_function | None | | free_capacity_gb | 1592.07 <-★free capacity of volumes_meta | | goodness_function | None | | location_info | ceph:/etc/ceph/ceph.conf:<uuid>:cinder:volumes_meta | | max_over_subscription_ratio | 20.0 | | multiattach | True | | name | <hostname>@ceph#ceph | | qos_support | True | | replication_enabled | False | | reserved_percentage | 0 | | storage_protocol | ceph | | thin_provisioning_support | True | | timestamp | 2025-05-29T07:44:17.903149 | | total_capacity_gb | 1592.07 | | vendor_name | Open Source | | volume_backend_name | ceph | +-----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ OpenStack and Ceph versions are: $ ceph -v ceph version 17.2.8 (f817ceb7f187defb1d021d6328fa833eb8e943b3) quincy (stable) $ dnf list --installed | grep openstack-cinder openstack-cinder.noarch 1:21.3.2-1.el9s @centos-openstack-zed

4 4

[ops][largescale-sig][scientific-sig] Ops Radio Hour on May 30, 2025
by Ildiko Vancsa 02 Jun '25

02 Jun '25

Hi OpenStack Community, I'm reaching out to you to draw your attention to a new online gathering called Ops Radio Hour. The call series is a casual setting for operators, engineers, and contributors to come together, share knowledge, and collaborate on the complexities of managing and deploying OpenStack environments. The first meeting is scheduled to May 30, 2025 at 1400UTC [1]. The call will happen on Meetpad, and you can find the agenda on the etherpad[2] created for the series. See You there! Best Regards, Ildikó [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Operations/Meetups#2025_Ops_Radio_Hour_Seri… [2] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openstack_ops_radiohour

2 4

[telemetry] Nominate Jaromír Wysoglad to Telemetry Core
by Juan Larriba 01 Jun '25

01 Jun '25

Hi, One of the things I wanted to do when becoming PTL of telemetry was to revive the interest in the community as I sensed that telemetry had been left a little bit behind from the rest of the projects. Since then, there has been a lot of movement: new Ceilometer features were added and even new projects (aethos, a prometheus-keystone proxy and grian-ui, a new metric displaying dashboard for Horizon) which has showed that the interest in gathering and displaying better and more scalable metrics is only growing. In these circumstances, the very small core contributor team needs to grow to keep up with all the influx of new features coming from the amazing community and I cannot think of anyone better than Jaromír Wysoglad to fulfill that role. Jaromír has been involved in the telemetry upstream community for years, tirelessly working to, among other things, make the whole telemetry suite to be compatible with Prometheus storage. He has implemented Prometheus compatibility with aodh, python-observabilityclient and many other things, including maintaining and improving the telemetry tempest test suite. Recently he created and is writing from scratch aetos, the new openstack-prometheus compatibility layer. I can't see a better contributor to the core group. If I don't hear any objections for one week, I'll add Jaromír to the group. Best Regards, Juan Larriba

3 3