[openstack-dev] Multinode testing with devstack and neutron broken

Clark Boylan cboylan at sapwetik.org
Tue Oct 11 23:54:46 UTC 2016


On Tue, Oct 11, 2016, at 04:51 PM, Armando M. wrote:
> On 11 October 2016 at 16:43, Clark Boylan <cboylan at sapwetik.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016, at 04:32 PM, Armando M. wrote:
> > > On 11 October 2016 at 14:09, Clark Boylan <cboylan at sapwetik.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello everyone,
> > > >
> > > > Currently multinode testing + neutron is broken in clouds that use
> > > > portions of 10.0.0.0/8 for their networking due to route conflicts
> > with
> > > > devstack + neutron deployments. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
> > s/1629133
> > > > is tracking the issue for us. I would like to see this get resolved
> > > > properly before we do further work on multinode testing as it is
> > > > difficult to review and determine what failures are legit vs which
> > > > failures are related to this bug and whether or not a specific
> > multinode
> > > > test has decided to workaround the issue.
> > > >
> > > > The change to use subnet pools in devstack is a non backward compatible
> > > > change for devstack currently and it doesn't appear to have been
> > > > documented in devstack at all. Would be great if we can finally fix
> > this
> > > > and get testing back to working and however we fix it ensure that
> > > > devstack has the appropriate documentation.
> > > >
> > >
> > > What is holding [1] back? Merging that would resolve the issue, then we
> > > can
> > > drill down into why subnetpools interfere with the underlying networking
> > > setup. I have asked Carl to look into broken build [2]
> > >
> > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/379543/
> > > [2]
> > > http://logs.openstack.org/78/381278/2/check/gate-tempest-dsv
> > m-neutron-multinode-full-ubuntu-xenial/7f82862/console.html.gz
> >
> > Yours is one of the two -1's on the change :) I think that devstack core
> > is probably holding back due to the two -1s there. If we are ok with
> > iterating on making it better rather than all in one shot maybe that
> > change is good for now and we can update the reviews?
> >
> 
> Well, that means the ball is in the contributor's court, who is supposed
> to
> address reviewers' concerns :)
> 
The comments on the change with -1's are opposed to doing what the
change does. I don't know how I can possibly address them.

Clark



More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list