| *** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:05 | |
| *** tetsuro_ has quit IRC | 00:07 | |
| *** armax has quit IRC | 00:08 | |
| *** armax has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:12 | |
| *** mattw4 has quit IRC | 00:20 | |
| *** jawad_axd has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:31 | |
| *** jawad_axd has quit IRC | 00:35 | |
| *** maohongbo1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:43 | |
| *** maohongbo has quit IRC | 00:45 | |
| *** maohongbo1 is now known as maohongbo | 00:45 | |
| *** armax has quit IRC | 00:45 | |
| *** maohongbo has quit IRC | 00:49 | |
| *** maohongbo has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:49 | |
| *** brinzhang has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:00 | |
| *** tetsuro has quit IRC | 01:04 | |
| *** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:04 | |
| *** tetsuro has quit IRC | 01:08 | |
| *** Liang__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:10 | |
| *** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:11 | |
| *** maohongbo has quit IRC | 01:12 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 01:17 | |
| *** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:17 | |
| *** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:22 | |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 01:23 | |
| *** tetsuro has quit IRC | 01:26 | |
| *** ykatabam has quit IRC | 01:49 | |
| *** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:00 | |
| *** tetsuro_ has quit IRC | 02:04 | |
| *** Liang__ is now known as LiangFang | 02:08 | |
| *** tonyb has quit IRC | 02:10 | |
| *** tinwood has quit IRC | 02:10 | |
| *** tinwood has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:12 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:31 | |
| *** brinzhang has quit IRC | 02:34 | |
| *** carloss has quit IRC | 02:48 | |
| *** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:02 | |
| *** tetsuro has quit IRC | 03:07 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 03:07 | |
| *** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:11 | |
| *** apetrich has quit IRC | 03:13 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 03:16 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:28 | |
| *** psachin has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:42 | |
| *** ricolin_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:57 | |
| *** ricolin_ has quit IRC | 03:57 | |
| *** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:59 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 04:02 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:03 | |
| *** masahito_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:02 | |
| *** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:11 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 05:16 | |
| *** links has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:21 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:31 | |
| *** masahito_ has quit IRC | 05:35 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 05:35 | |
| *** vishakha has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:36 | |
| *** masahito has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:41 | |
| *** masahito has quit IRC | 05:48 | |
| *** masahito has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:55 | |
| *** tris has quit IRC | 06:07 | |
| *** tris has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:14 | |
| *** rcernin has quit IRC | 06:32 | |
| *** ykatabam has quit IRC | 06:32 | |
| *** anastzhyr has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:43 | |
| *** tris has quit IRC | 06:44 | |
| *** tris has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:45 | |
| *** jawad_axd has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:19 | |
| *** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:52 | |
| *** pcaruana has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:02 | |
| *** rpittau|afk is now known as rpittau | 08:06 | |
| *** slaweq_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:29 | |
| *** tesseract has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:30 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 08:31 | |
| *** links has quit IRC | 08:35 | |
| *** trident has quit IRC | 08:37 | |
| *** trident has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:39 | |
| *** links has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:40 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:42 | |
| *** jiaopengju has quit IRC | 08:43 | |
| *** jiaopengju has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:43 | |
| *** tetsuro has quit IRC | 08:43 | |
| *** jraju__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:49 | |
| *** links has quit IRC | 08:49 | |
| *** jraju__ has quit IRC | 09:03 | |
| *** ralonsoh has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:03 | |
| *** LiangFang has quit IRC | 09:12 | |
| *** apetrich has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:12 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:15 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 09:19 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 09:20 | |
| *** electrofelix has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:36 | |
| *** slaweq_ has quit IRC | 09:38 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:44 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 09:45 | |
| *** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:45 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:48 | |
| *** slaweq_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:50 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 09:53 | |
| *** masahito has quit IRC | 09:58 | |
| *** tetsuro has quit IRC | 10:05 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:08 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:14 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 10:15 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:16 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 10:21 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:22 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 10:27 | |
| *** anastzhyr has quit IRC | 10:33 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:47 | |
| *** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:49 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 10:52 | |
| *** brinzhang has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:54 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:55 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has quit IRC | 10:57 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 10:58 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:59 | |
| *** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:07 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 11:12 | |
| *** rpittau is now known as rpittau|bbl | 11:18 | |
| *** ykatabam has quit IRC | 11:29 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:30 | |
| *** dviroel has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:47 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:48 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 11:52 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:58 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 12:00 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:02 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 12:07 | |
| *** enriquetaso has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:08 | |
| *** tetsuro has quit IRC | 12:15 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:28 | |
| *** brinzhang has quit IRC | 12:31 | |
| *** brinzhang has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:31 | |
| *** brinzhang has quit IRC | 12:33 | |
| *** brinzhang has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:34 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has quit IRC | 12:34 | |
| *** brinzhang has quit IRC | 12:35 | |
| *** brinzhang has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:36 | |
| *** dosaboy has quit IRC | 12:44 | |
| *** dosaboy has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:45 | |
| *** jawad_axd has quit IRC | 12:50 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC | 12:51 | |
| *** rfolco has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:54 | |
| *** jawad_axd has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:59 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:59 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:00 | |
| *** zbr|rover has quit IRC | 13:00 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has quit IRC | 13:01 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:02 | |
| *** brinzhang has quit IRC | 13:03 | |
| *** belmoreira has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:16 | |
| *** rpittau|bbl is now known as rpittau | 13:25 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:32 | |
| *** brinzhang has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:36 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 13:37 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has quit IRC | 13:40 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:48 | |
| *** efried has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:50 | |
| *** alistarle has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:53 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 13:54 | |
| *** davidsha has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:55 | |
| *** alex_xu has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:55 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:55 | |
| efried | #startmeeting nova | 14:00 |
|---|---|---|
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Jan 9 14:00:16 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is efried. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 14:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 14:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: nova)" | 14:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'nova' | 14:00 |
| efried | #link agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova#Weekly_Nova_team_meeting | 14:00 |
| gibi | o/ | 14:00 |
| * gibi is on a parallel meeting so a bit on and off | 14:00 | |
| alistarle | o/ | 14:01 |
| alex_xu | o/ | 14:01 |
| *** huaqiang has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:02 | |
| *** sean-k-mooney has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:03 | |
| sean-k-mooney | o/ | 14:03 |
| kaisers | o/ | 14:03 |
| huaqiang | o/ | 14:03 |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 14:03 | |
| *** lyarwood has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:03 | |
| lyarwood | \o | 14:03 |
| efried | Okay, let's get started. | 14:03 |
| efried | Welcome back | 14:03 |
| efried | #topic Last meeting | 14:03 |
| efried | #link Minutes from last meeting: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/nova/2019/nova.2019-12-12-14.00.html | 14:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Last meeting (Meeting topic: nova)" | 14:03 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:04 | |
| *** eharney has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:04 | |
| efried | #topic Bugs (stuck/critical) | 14:05 |
| efried | No Critical bugs | 14:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Bugs (stuck/critical) (Meeting topic: nova)" | 14:05 | |
| efried | stop me if you have things to say on a topic. | 14:05 |
| efried | #topic Reminders | 14:05 |
| efried | 5 weeks to spec freeze. | 14:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Reminders (Meeting topic: nova)" | 14:05 | |
| efried | #link ussuri open specs https://review.opendev.org/#/q/project:openstack/nova-specs+status:open+path:%255Especs/ussuri/approved/.* | 14:06 |
| efried | couple dozen there. | 14:06 |
| sean-k-mooney | efried: has your vtpm spec merged | 14:06 |
| *** brinzhang_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:06 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has left #openstack-meeting | 14:06 | |
| sean-k-mooney | you adressed stephenfins nits right | 14:06 |
| efried | sean-k-mooney: not yet. stephenfin wanted that little update yesterday and said he would fast approve, but it looks like he's been pulled away | 14:06 |
| efried | yes | 14:07 |
| *** brinzhang_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:07 | |
| sean-k-mooney | ok cool | 14:07 |
| sean-k-mooney | ill ping him after the meeting | 14:07 |
| efried | thanks sean-k-mooney | 14:07 |
| efried | gibi: minor update to that if you want to re+2 for form's sake. | 14:07 |
| efried | #link vTPM spec https://review.opendev.org/686804 | 14:07 |
| efried | also | 14:08 |
| efried | #link ussuri blueprints https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/ussuri | 14:08 |
| gibi | efried: ack | 14:08 |
| efried | which may not be the same list, because not every blueprint needs a spec; and it's possible some of those specs don't have blueprints (they should - that would be a miss by the author) though I haven't checked. | 14:09 |
| efried | #action efried to paw through blueprints and specs and reconcile | 14:09 |
| efried | unless someone else wants to volunteer for that drudgery ^ | 14:09 |
| efried | I know, way to sell it. | 14:09 |
| sean-k-mooney | efried: do we intend to still do a desinge /direction assement of approved blueprint when we reach sepc freeze | 14:09 |
| *** brinzhang has quit IRC | 14:10 | |
| sean-k-mooney | it feel like we have less the last cycle | 14:10 |
| *** brinzhang has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:10 | |
| efried | Agree, but I still think it would be prudent to prune and prioritize | 14:10 |
| efried | especially since we've lost half of the core team since December. | 14:10 |
| efried | by which I mean mriedem | 14:11 |
| *** brinzhang has quit IRC | 14:11 | |
| sean-k-mooney | ack just confirming we will still do that when we have hit spec freeze | 14:11 |
| *** brinzhang has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:11 | |
| efried | there are 17 | 14:11 |
| efried | #link ussuri merged specs https://review.opendev.org/#/q/project:openstack/nova-specs+status:merged+path:%255Especs/ussuri/approved/.* | 14:11 |
| efried | and IIRC we were talking about a cutoff in the neighborhood of 30 | 14:12 |
| brinzhang_ | https://review.opendev.org/#/q/owner:%22Brin+Zhang+%253Czhangbailin%2540inspur.com%253E%22++project:openstack/nova-specs++status:open | 14:12 |
| efried | so if we follow that, we would expect approx a dozen to be cut. | 14:12 |
| brinzhang_ | hi I have some specs, could you review this? or talking about it now? | 14:12 |
| efried | Sure, now is as good a time as any :) | 14:13 |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 14:13 | |
| efried | anything specific to discuss here brinzhang_, or just a general request for reviews? | 14:13 |
| sean-k-mooney | it looks like each is a small independ feature | 14:14 |
| brinzhang_ | https://review.opendev.org/#/c/580336/ this I want to know shold I continue it, and I was pushed it's poc code already | 14:14 |
| sean-k-mooney | am i correct in saying there are no depencies between these sepcs | 14:14 |
| brinzhang_ | https://review.opendev.org/#/c/693828/ | 14:14 |
| alex_xu | the concern for 580336 is swap_volume is admin API | 14:15 |
| * lyarwood reads | 14:15 | |
| brinzhang_ | sean-k-mooney: yeah, it's samll, but I think need to continue | 14:15 |
| alex_xu | one way is adding a separate policy rule for the delete_on_terminate update | 14:15 |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:16 | |
| *** brinzhang has quit IRC | 14:16 | |
| sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: could you not that in the spec | 14:16 |
| *** zbr has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:16 | |
| sean-k-mooney | *note | 14:16 |
| *** brinzhang has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:17 | |
| brinzhang_ | yeah, this is a way to avoid the policy role | 14:17 |
| alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: I note that in previous PS | 14:17 |
| sean-k-mooney | ah ok | 14:17 |
| *** brinzhang_ has quit IRC | 14:17 | |
| *** brinzhang has quit IRC | 14:17 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:18 | |
| efried | Anything else on specs/blueprints for now? | 14:18 |
| *** zbr is now known as zbr|rover | 14:18 | |
| efried | huaqiang: this would probably be a better time to bring up yours | 14:18 |
| huaqiang | thanks efried | 14:19 |
| efried | [Huaqiang] Spec: Use PCPU and VCPU in one instance: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/668656/. We have agreements in PTG meeting on the following aspects but during recent review process some different opinions raised: | 14:19 |
| efried | Specifying instance dedicated CPU mask vs specifying CPU count. Sean-k-mooney raised a flavor example for using CPU mask proposal in this place: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/668656/14/specs/ussuri/approved/use-pcpu-vcpu-in-one-instance.rst Line#146 | 14:19 |
| efried | Keep the interface of creating 'mixed' instance through 'resources:PCPU' and 'resources:VCPU' vs removing this interface. In L253, sean-k-mooney thinks that keeping the interface will cause issues with NUMA mechanism. | 14:19 |
| huaqiang | as stated, we have agreements in the PDT meeting | 14:19 |
| efried | it would probably be best to have stephenfin in the room if we're going to make progress on this | 14:19 |
| huaqiang | but I think sean-k-moony's comments are prtty reasonable | 14:19 |
| huaqiang | agree | 14:20 |
| sean-k-mooney | my concuer with the resouce: synatx is that it couples the flavor to the current modelingin placment | 14:20 |
| sean-k-mooney | so fi that evovles we dont have a laryer of indrection to hide that form our users so it fragile | 14:20 |
| efried | I haven't been paying attention to this | 14:21 |
| efried | but | 14:21 |
| efried | if the question is whether we should be using placement-ese vs. flavor-ese syntax, | 14:21 |
| alex_xu | yea, that we don't have consistent agreement at here. we support pcpu with resource syntax, but we don't support vpmem with reosurce syntax | 14:21 |
| efried | I want the latter | 14:21 |
| efried | I recognize we enabled support for the former for a few things, but I think we should move away from that in general. | 14:22 |
| sean-k-mooney | i have a stong prefernce of the flavor-ese approch too. | 14:22 |
| efried | Two main reasons | 14:22 |
| alex_xu | I'm ok with flavor-ese also | 14:22 |
| huaqiang | Another for discussion, is specify a CPU mask for dedicated CPUS | 14:23 |
| efried | 1) Placement-ese syntax is hard. It's powerful for the API, but tough for humans to generate sensibly. Specifically in the case of CPU type stuff, they're already familiar with the flavor-ese syntax | 14:23 |
| efried | 2) We will sometimes/often want non-placement side effects to be triggered by these options. | 14:24 |
| efried | In some cases we would be able to guess what those should be, but in some cases we'll need separate knobs | 14:24 |
| efried | and in those cases we would end up with a mix of placement- and flavor-type syntax, which is icky. | 14:24 |
| alex_xu | yea, special after have numa in placement | 14:24 |
| efried | for sure ^ | 14:25 |
| sean-k-mooney | huaqiang: so to the second point on mask vs count | 14:25 |
| sean-k-mooney | i prefer a mask of list of pinned cpus so that with in the guest i have a way of know which cpus are pinned so i can confure my gues accordingly | 14:25 |
| huaqiang | yes. need input for these two | 14:25 |
| efried | sean-k-mooney: are we talking about enumerating the *host* CPU IDs or the *guest* CPU IDs? | 14:26 |
| sean-k-mooney | if we have a count we need to either discover the info dymicaly via medatadata api or hav a convention | 14:26 |
| sean-k-mooney | guest | 14:26 |
| *** slaweq_ is now known as slaweq | 14:26 | |
| alex_xu | efried: guest CPU IDs | 14:27 |
| sean-k-mooney | so i was sugestin a mask so you could say core 0 floats and the rest re pined so you could in the guest use core 0 for the os and 1-n for the application | 14:27 |
| alex_xu | or just bitmask | 14:27 |
| efried | I remember talking about this. We need some way for the guest to discover which CPUs are dedicated. I'm not sure anything in the flavor helps us achieve that. | 14:27 |
| dansmith | efried: by placement-ese you mean things like resources:THING=1 ? | 14:27 |
| efried | dansmith: yes | 14:27 |
| dansmith | and flavor-ese being what? | 14:28 |
| efried | hw:numa_widgets=4 | 14:28 |
| sean-k-mooney | hw:whatever= | 14:28 |
| dansmith | sorry I'm just jumping in here, but what's the exact example here, I was thinking pinning of some sort? | 14:28 |
| sean-k-mooney | yes so we are discussing mix cpus so a vm with some shared/floating cpus and some pinned | 14:29 |
| efried | In this specific case we're talking about mixing PCPUs and VCPUs in one instance | 14:29 |
| efried | and how the flavor should specify those. | 14:29 |
| dansmith | vcpu and pcpu together, but what is the knob we'd be turning in that case | 14:29 |
| *** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC | 14:29 | |
| efried | well, we're discussing whether the syntax should allow you to specify CPU IDs or just a count. If the former, obv placement-ese doesn't work. | 14:30 |
| dansmith | right, so that was going to be my point: | 14:30 |
| efried | but even if the latter, I don't like the idea of using placement-ese for reasons | 14:30 |
| * bauzas waves after the meeting he had | 14:30 | |
| dansmith | for cases where we're specifying traits and simple resource counts, I see the placement-ese as a major improvement over how things have been in the past, simply because it's simple and standard | 14:31 |
| dansmith | are you saying you want to reverse course on resource and trait specifications in that syntax entirely? | 14:32 |
| sean-k-mooney | righti if we dind resouces=VCPU:2,PCPU6 that is speficfly an umbered group which means if we model pcpus per num node and have a two numa node guest you would have to change the syntax to use the number form | 14:33 |
| efried | I'm not saying we should remove support for placement-ese syntax. I'm saying that for new work, I think we should get in the habit of not using it when it's more than just a scheduling filter. | 14:33 |
| dansmith | efried: why is that? meaning, what are the "reasons" ? | 14:33 |
| efried | iow I don't like it when placement-ese syntax results in side effects, e.g. guest config | 14:33 |
| sean-k-mooney | where as if we did hw:pinned_cpus=2-4,5-7 hw:numa_node=2 | 14:34 |
| efried | like trait:CAN_DO_THING=required resulting in <thing>on</thing> | 14:34 |
| sean-k-mooney | then we can keep the flavor the same and change the placmenet query depending on if we have numa in placment or not | 14:34 |
| efried | dansmith: see 1) and 2) at time stamp :23:52 | 14:35 |
| dansmith | efried: okay, well, that's something I can follow I guess. I'm not sure why it's bad though.. making the users and ops know the distinction of "well, I asked for some resource, why don't I have it?" or "why do I have to specify things in this format if it's devicey and not if not?" | 14:35 |
| efried | I've gone into this reasoning more eloquently/completely in various reviews as well | 14:35 |
| efried | dansmith: precisely. | 14:36 |
| dansmith | what, you think making them realize the difference is a good thing? | 14:36 |
| efried | Supporting pass-through placement-ese which is sometimes side-effecty and sometimes not is bad. So I'm saying we shouldn't be promoting/documenting that pass-through-ness. | 14:36 |
| efried | If you want to do a specific thing, follow the documentation for the syntax for that thing | 14:37 |
| efried | and if we decide a *specific* placement-ese trait or resource k=v is appropriate for that, it'll be in the docs | 14:37 |
| efried | though in general I would prefer to avoid even that | 14:37 |
| sean-k-mooney | efried: you dont want to oterwise identical vms that land on the same host to have different side ieefec if one requested a trait and the other did not right | 14:38 |
| efried | I guess that's one way to think of it. | 14:38 |
| sean-k-mooney | /side ieefect/sideffects/ | 14:38 |
| efried | I want trait:FOO=required to make you land on a host with FOO. I want hw:make_foo_happen to a) add required=FOO to the placement request *and* b) turn <foo>on</foo> in the guest XML. | 14:39 |
| dansmith | okay, I guess I have a major reaction to what seems to be reverting to the "old" non-standard, confusing has-changed-and-broken-people way of doing that, where individual patch authors make up their own syntax for each feature, and placement syntax being strict and simple was a blessing to me | 14:39 |
| *** mriedem has left #openstack-meeting | 14:40 | |
| alex_xu | will placement syntax be simple after we have numa? | 14:40 |
| efried | strict and simple, but not always powerful enough. | 14:41 |
| sean-k-mooney | ok so in the interest of time lets loop back to the mask vs cound question | 14:41 |
| dansmith | no, and I get that it's not powerful enough as it is | 14:41 |
| sean-k-mooney | *count | 14:41 |
| efried | So whether we decide to use | 14:41 |
| efried | - $pinned_count, a convention saying e.g. the first $pinned_count guest CPU IDs are pinned and the remaining ($total - $pinned_count) are shared; or | 14:41 |
| efried | - a $pinned_mask | 14:41 |
| efried | ...there needs to be some way for the guest to find out either $pinned_count or $pinned_mask. What did we decide that mechanism would be? Config drive? | 14:41 |
| dansmith | yep, sorry, I just literally flipped on the monitor when I woke up and saw the placement-ese thing, didn't mean to derail | 14:41 |
| sean-k-mooney | shoudl we allow the flaovor to say wich cores are pinned and which float (with a mask or list) or how many cores are pinned(possible per numa node) and have the driver decide which ones are | 14:42 |
| efried | dansmith: it is relevant, specifically one of the topics on the agenda. So we need to continue the discussion. But maybe we can take it back to -nova after the meeting. | 14:42 |
| sean-k-mooney | i prefer hw:pinned_cpus=2-4 where core 0 is floating but the alterinve would be hw:pinned_cores_count=3 | 14:43 |
| sean-k-mooney | the extrapec propsed in the spec are different but the name dont matter right now | 14:44 |
| brinzhang_ | sean-k-mooney: I think it's a good idea, we should konw which vcpu pinned which numa node | 14:44 |
| efried | yes | 14:44 |
| efried | maybe not immediately | 14:45 |
| sean-k-mooney | dansmith: efried effectivly im suggestion we just use the syntax form the vcpu_pin_set | 14:45 |
| efried | I'm in favor of that | 14:45 |
| sean-k-mooney | but the cores you list would be the logical guest cores not the host cores | 14:45 |
| efried | might be nice if the name indicated that somehow, e.g. by including '_guest_'. But we can bikeshed that. | 14:46 |
| efried | But my question remains: | 14:46 |
| efried | how does the guest *find out*? | 14:46 |
| alex_xu | there is propose for metadata API | 14:46 |
| sean-k-mooney | in the spec i belive the metadata api was going to be extended to include it | 14:46 |
| sean-k-mooney | also i assuem the toplogy api we just added could also be extended | 14:47 |
| efried | there wasn't some kind of magic where it shows up automatically in sysfs? | 14:47 |
| efried | or procfs | 14:47 |
| sean-k-mooney | no | 14:47 |
| alex_xu | no | 14:47 |
| *** pcaruana has quit IRC | 14:47 | |
| efried | okay. | 14:47 |
| dansmith | wait, what? | 14:47 |
| dansmith | the guest will know about its topology in the usual fashion, right? isn't that what efried is asking? | 14:47 |
| efried | dansmith: the guest needs to be able to figure out which of its CPUs are pinned and which shared. | 14:47 |
| dansmith | oh, I see | 14:47 |
| dansmith | yeah, that has to be metadata | 14:48 |
| sean-k-mooney | dansmith: yes but there is no way to tell the kernel what is pinned or not | 14:48 |
| dansmith | right | 14:48 |
| efried | okay cool. | 14:48 |
| efried | did we land? | 14:48 |
| *** psachin has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| huaqiang | so, do we have conclusion? count or mask? | 14:49 |
| sean-k-mooney | i think we laned on use extra spec/flavor syntack and use a list like the vpcu_pin_set brinzhang_ ? that work for you alex_xu ? | 14:49 |
| alex_xu | works for me | 14:49 |
| brinzhang_ | me too | 14:49 |
| huaqiang | thanks | 14:50 |
| efried | I guess the question remains whether we should (or can) block the placement-ese syntax | 14:50 |
| dansmith | so, based on what you said above (I think): | 14:51 |
| sean-k-mooney | well we can but im not sure if we should | 14:51 |
| efried | IIRC stephenfin's PCPU work in train made a big deal of supporting that specifically | 14:51 |
| efried | so this would be a step backwards | 14:51 |
| dansmith | you're okay with hw: implying resources, but not resources implying hw: stuff? | 14:51 |
| efried | I must not have complained loudly enough. | 14:51 |
| efried | dansmith: yes, exactly that. | 14:51 |
| dansmith | what would be the blocking then? if they specify any pcpu in resources they're toast? | 14:52 |
| efried | because resources syntax isn't always powerful enough to express hw: stuff so we would need to mix in hw: syntax anyway in those cases, which IMO is more confusing | 14:52 |
| efried | Yeah, that's what I'm trying to noodle. Because I think stephenfin's work in train may have made it so resources:PCPU does in fact imply some (simple) hw:-y stuff. | 14:52 |
| sean-k-mooney | it did which i did not like either | 14:53 |
| dansmith | right, just asking for one PCU:1 gets you one pinned cpu with minimal opinion on how right? | 14:53 |
| efried | So I think we're okay actually if we just leave support for that (the train syntax) but explode if you try to *mix* with placement-ese. | 14:54 |
| efried | IOW if you specify both resources:PCPU and resources:VCPU, boom | 14:54 |
| sean-k-mooney | ya it will but PCPU:2 hw:numa_nodes=2 would break if we had numa in placement | 14:54 |
| efried | that too | 14:54 |
| dansmith | efried: I don't think that works, because vcpu is always specified by the flavor's own property, and we've said they can override that with VCPUs and PCPUs right? | 14:54 |
| *** jawad_axd has quit IRC | 14:55 | |
| efried | dansmith: I don't have the details swapped in, but stephenfin wrote some intricate and very specific checks for those permutations. | 14:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | well we translate flavor.vcpu into either PCPUs or VCPUs | 14:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | and you can override them but yes | 14:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: also added a lot of checks for edgecases | 14:55 |
| efried | ...but I'm pretty sure they included checks so that if you wound up with both PCPUs and VCPUs it would fail. | 14:55 |
| *** jawad_axd has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:56 | |
| efried | Oh, right, because there's a hard restriction on flavor.vcpus=0 | 14:56 |
| sean-k-mooney | yes i think that is blocked currently | 14:56 |
| efried | or am I confusing that with something else? | 14:56 |
| dansmith | yeah, I'm talking about the more general rule we've had (specifically for ironic) where overriding the resources specified in the flavor itself are done with the resources syntax, | 14:57 |
| dansmith | so it would be weird in this case to have that not be a thing because we're trying to ban specifying both or something | 14:57 |
| *** brinzhang_ has quit IRC | 14:57 | |
| sean-k-mooney | dansmith: yes in that case you set resouces=0 rather then the flavor values | 14:57 |
| *** brinzhang_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:58 | |
| *** jawad_axd has quit IRC | 14:58 | |
| efried | ...so rather than lifting that restriction, we decided you had to specify vcpus=$count and then also specify resources:PCPU=$count (the same $count) if you wanted them to be pinned. | 14:58 |
| efried | So we would either need to lift that restriction, or make some new rule about e.g. resources:VCPU=$s,resources:PCPU=$p, flavor.vcpus=$(s+p) (ugh) | 14:58 |
| sean-k-mooney | i think we can proceed with the feature without specificly blocking the overdies and just document dont do this | 14:58 |
| *** jawad_ax_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:58 | |
| *** gagehugo has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:58 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has quit IRC | 14:59 | |
| dansmith | efried: the easy thing to allow is the case where you don't specify VCPUs or you do and the math is right, right? | 14:59 |
| efried | dansmith: we may be overthinking it. Today I'm 95% sure if you specify both resources:PCPU and resources:VCPU you'll explode. Keep that. | 14:59 |
| efried | yeah | 14:59 |
| efried | oh | 14:59 |
| efried | um | 14:59 |
| *** brinzhang_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:59 | |
| efried | you mean "specify VCPUs" in placement-ese? | 14:59 |
| efried | No | 14:59 |
| dansmith | well, whatever, it just seems like we're doing the thing I'm concerned about, which is that every feature has its own set of complex rules for this, and things go up in smoke if you ever need to combine two complex features :/ | 15:00 |
| dansmith | yes, that's what I meant | 15:00 |
| efried | Time. | 15:00 |
| efried | Let's continue in -nova. | 15:00 |
| efried | #endmeeting | 15:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/" | 15:00 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Jan 9 15:00:14 2020 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:00 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/nova/2020/nova.2020-01-09-14.00.html | 15:00 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/nova/2020/nova.2020-01-09-14.00.txt | 15:00 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/nova/2020/nova.2020-01-09-14.00.log.html | 15:00 |
| gagehugo | #startmeeting security | 15:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Jan 9 15:00:26 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gagehugo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: security)" | 15:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'security' | 15:00 |
| *** mhen has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:00 | |
| *** sean-k-mooney has left #openstack-meeting | 15:00 | |
| gagehugo | #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/security-agenda agenda | 15:00 |
| *** huaqiang has left #openstack-meeting | 15:00 | |
| *** andrebeltrami has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:01 | |
| gagehugo | o/ | 15:01 |
| fungi | light agenda again this week | 15:01 |
| *** alistarle has left #openstack-meeting | 15:01 | |
| *** jawad_ax_ has quit IRC | 15:02 | |
| *** pcaruana has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:02 | |
| mhen | o/ | 15:02 |
| *** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:03 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has quit IRC | 15:04 | |
| *** brinzhang_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:04 | |
| gagehugo | #topic open discussion | 15:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion (Meeting topic: security)" | 15:05 | |
| gagehugo | floor is open, light agenda today | 15:06 |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:07 | |
| fungi | one thing worth thinking about | 15:08 |
| fungi | once the vulnerability:managed policy update lands, that'll be a good opportunity for a review of currently covered projects against the remaining requirements | 15:09 |
| gagehugo | Good point | 15:10 |
| *** carloss has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:10 | |
| fungi | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons#Vulnerability_management | 15:10 |
| *** brinzhang_ has quit IRC | 15:11 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:11 | |
| fungi | stuff like making sure that's updated, and teams have a reasonable number of members in them, and that defect trackers are configured so that private security issues are initially only shared with them and/or the vmt | 15:11 |
| fungi | also closely scrutinize any multi-repo deliverables with the tag | 15:12 |
| fungi | and make sure covered deliverables are marked as following some sort of release model | 15:13 |
| gagehugo | ok | 15:15 |
| fungi | oh, and a big one | 15:15 |
| fungi | the vmt is going to need to declassify a bunch of long-private reports of suspected vulnerabilities once the 90-day limit goes into effect | 15:15 |
| fungi | so we'll have a bunch of those to talk about when that happens, i expect | 15:16 |
| gagehugo | yes that too | 15:16 |
| fungi | as soon as that update goes into effect, we'll leave a consistent comment on all currently private security bugs | 15:16 |
| fungi | and start the 90-day countdown | 15:17 |
| fungi | also we probably should update our embargo preamble template with those details so new reports include the embargo limit timeframe | 15:17 |
| gagehugo | sure | 15:18 |
| * fungi makes a to do note | 15:18 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 15:19 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:20 | |
| gagehugo | couple things to do then | 15:21 |
| fungi | yeah, i've added them to my personal to do list, but that doesn't necessarily mean i have to be the one to do them | 15:22 |
| gagehugo | I can tackle some in my spare time | 15:23 |
| *** armstrong has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:23 | |
| fungi | volunteers welcome (though to update still-embargoed vulnerabilities the volunteer needs to also volunteer to be on the vmt) | 15:23 |
| fungi | (or already be on the vmt, sure) | 15:23 |
| *** anastzhyr has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:23 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 15:24 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:24 | |
| gagehugo | yup | 15:26 |
| gagehugo | mhen: you have anything? | 15:26 |
| mhen | nope | 15:26 |
| gagehugo | mhen: fungi thanks for coming, have a good weekend! | 15:27 |
| gagehugo | #endmeeting | 15:27 |
| *** ykatabam has quit IRC | 15:27 | |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/" | 15:27 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Jan 9 15:27:15 2020 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:27 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/security/2020/security.2020-01-09-15.00.html | 15:27 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/security/2020/security.2020-01-09-15.00.txt | 15:27 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/security/2020/security.2020-01-09-15.00.log.html | 15:27 |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 15:28 | |
| fungi | thanks gagehugo! | 15:31 |
| *** armax has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:59 | |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:03 | |
| *** jawad_axd has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:07 | |
| *** jawad_ax_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:09 | |
| *** jawad_axd has quit IRC | 16:09 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 16:17 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:28 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC | 16:30 | |
| *** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:34 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:37 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 16:38 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 16:40 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC | 16:43 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:44 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC | 16:46 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 16:56 | |
| *** mattw4 has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:00 | |
| *** tesseract has quit IRC | 17:01 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 17:03 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:06 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:10 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 17:16 | |
| *** rpittau is now known as rpittau|afk | 17:44 | |
| *** eharney has quit IRC | 17:44 | |
| *** jawad_ax_ has quit IRC | 18:04 | |
| *** davidsha has quit IRC | 18:05 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:07 | |
| *** carloss has quit IRC | 18:10 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 18:15 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:16 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 18:21 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:23 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC | 18:25 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 18:27 | |
| *** electrofelix has quit IRC | 18:31 | |
| *** andrebeltrami has quit IRC | 18:50 | |
| *** eharney has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:01 | |
| *** bbowen has quit IRC | 19:16 | |
| *** bbowen has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:19 | |
| *** pcaruana has quit IRC | 19:35 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:42 | |
| *** ralonsoh has quit IRC | 19:44 | |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 19:47 | |
| *** gagehugo has left #openstack-meeting | 20:05 | |
| *** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:07 | |
| *** armstrong has quit IRC | 20:12 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:21 | |
| *** hyunsikyang__ has quit IRC | 20:40 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC | 20:57 | |
| *** hyunsikyang has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:00 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:02 | |
| *** eharney has quit IRC | 21:05 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC | 21:10 | |
| *** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:11 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:42 | |
| *** hyunsikyang has quit IRC | 21:43 | |
| *** bbowen has quit IRC | 21:53 | |
| *** bbowen has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:54 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 22:19 | |
| *** bbowen has quit IRC | 22:32 | |
| *** bbowen has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:32 | |
| *** enriquetaso has quit IRC | 22:33 | |
| *** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:46 | |
| *** anastzhyr has quit IRC | 22:49 | |
| *** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:50 | |
| *** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:57 | |
| *** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:20 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 23:25 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 23:25 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:26 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 23:26 | |
| *** dviroel has quit IRC | 23:28 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!