16:00:47 <jungleboyj> #startmeeting cinder
16:00:48 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Mar 13 16:00:47 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is jungleboyj. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:49 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:00:51 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'cinder'
16:00:57 <geguileo> hi! o/
16:01:11 <davidsha> hi o/
16:01:14 <martinkennelly> hey o/
16:01:16 <jungleboyj> courtesy ping:  jungleboyj diablo_rojo, diablo_rojo_phon, rajinir tbarron xyang xyang1 e0ne gouthamr thingee erlon tpsilva ganso patrickeast tommylikehu eharney geguileo smcginnis lhx_ lhx__ aspiers jgriffith moshele hwalsh felipemonteiro lpetrut lseki _alastor_ whoami-rajat yikun rosmaita enriquetaso hemna _hemna
16:01:18 <woojay> hello.
16:01:21 <rosmaita> \o
16:01:22 <hemna_> doink
16:01:24 <e0ne> hi
16:01:25 <xyang> Hi
16:01:29 <yikun> o/
16:01:35 <jungleboyj> @!
16:01:35 <_pewp_> jungleboyj (¬_¬)ﾉ
16:01:36 <rajinir> o/
16:02:20 <whoami-rajat> Hi
16:03:52 <jungleboyj> Ok.  Looks like we are getting a good crowd here.
16:04:05 <jungleboyj> #topic announcements
16:04:50 <rosmaita> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/cinder-stein-meetings
16:04:52 <jungleboyj> We have passed Milestone-3 for Stein so we should now be focusing on testing Stein and fixing bugs.
16:05:00 <jungleboyj> rosmaita:  Thank you.
16:06:22 <jungleboyj> Any questions about that?
16:07:06 <jungleboyj> Also, I did submit my candidacy for PTL again.
16:07:20 <rosmaita> \o/
16:07:27 <jungleboyj> :-)
16:07:52 <jungleboyj> Didn't look like anyone else submitted a nomination.
16:08:02 <jungleboyj> So, thanks for the continued vote of confidence?
16:08:13 <whoami-rajat> jungleboyj: congratulations. :)
16:08:26 <e0ne> jungleboyj: thanks for your hard work
16:09:04 <jungleboyj> You are welcome.  Doing my best.
16:09:44 <jungleboyj> Ok, so I think we can move on from that.
16:10:38 <jungleboyj> #topic Cinder RSD driver status update
16:10:43 <jungleboyj> davidsha:
16:10:53 <jungleboyj> #link https://review.openstack.org/621465
16:11:59 <davidsha> Hi, We have had the CI running for almost a month now and it appears to be stable, we were wondering were there any additional requirements we need to meet before submissions are accepted again?
16:13:18 <hemna_> are we trying to merge the rsd driver for this release?
16:13:19 <hemna_> or next?
16:13:23 <jungleboyj> Just looking at the CI results.
16:13:25 <hemna_> seems a bit late ?
16:13:25 <davidsha> Train
16:13:26 <jungleboyj> hemna_:  Next.
16:13:30 <hemna_> ok
16:13:38 <jungleboyj> The test results look good I think.
16:13:57 <jungleboyj> Will need eharney to verify eventually but he is not here.
16:14:47 <jungleboyj> Need to have smcginnis add your CI to the list of CIs we are monitoring.
16:15:31 <davidsha> ack
16:15:46 <jungleboyj> So, I think all-in-all we are looking good to merge early in Train.
16:15:55 <jungleboyj> Need to do a review of it still.
16:16:54 <jungleboyj> As far as the merge date is concerned it can merge once we have done the RC for Stein and have opened Train for development.
16:17:29 <davidsha> perfect!
16:18:00 <jungleboyj> Thank you for your patience and for the update.
16:18:48 <davidsha> no prob, thanks for reviews (past and future).
16:18:59 <jungleboyj> davidsha:  Welcome.  Anything else?
16:19:12 <davidsha> Nope, thanks!
16:19:33 <jungleboyj> davidsha:  Are you able to stick around?  We have a discussion on os-brick that may impact you.
16:19:43 <davidsha> Ya, sure
16:19:49 <jungleboyj> Cool.  Thanks.
16:20:25 <jungleboyj> #topic cinder - os-brick (driver-connector) gaps
16:20:31 <jungleboyj> whoami-rajat: All your's.
16:21:40 <whoami-rajat> Just wanted to bring to everyone's awareness that we merged a rebranding patch of scaleio -> vxflexos in os-brick but it's dependent patches for nova and cinder were blocked due to feature freeze
16:22:30 <jungleboyj> whoami-rajat:  But we are reverting those patches so we shouldn't have a gap there anymore.  Correct?
16:23:02 <whoami-rajat> the discussion regarding this led to the conclusion that driver name changes doesn't need change in protocol or connection_properties (simply no change required in os-brick)
16:23:11 <whoami-rajat> jungleboyj: right.
16:24:02 <whoami-rajat> also i feel like to mention the sync should be maintained so as to avoid these type of reverts in future IMHO.
16:24:32 <jungleboyj> whoami-rajat:  Yes, agreed. I think this has been an learning experience for all of us.
16:24:55 <jungleboyj> Now that hemna_  has been more active again he was able to come in and catch our mistake.
16:25:08 <hemna_> I'm kinda here
16:25:13 <whoami-rajat> jungleboyj: may i query my concern regarding RSD driver?
16:25:44 <whoami-rajat> hemna_: all thanks for fixing it so quickly :)
16:25:49 <jungleboyj> So, first, I just want to make sure that we have the issues with scaleio resolved.
16:25:55 <hemna_> there are lots of problems associated with rebranding the protocol string
16:26:16 <jungleboyj> whoami-rajat: Has the patch for Nova been updated as well?
16:26:19 <whoami-rajat> jungleboyj:  https://review.openstack.org/#/c/643092/1 just this one is remaining.
16:26:44 <whoami-rajat> jungleboyj: unrelated to rebranding but during revert we also reverted this fix.
16:27:10 <whoami-rajat> jungleboyj: checking
16:27:18 <jungleboyj> whoami-rajat: Ok.  Thanks for pointing that out.  So we also need to get that merged before we cut a new release.
16:27:46 <whoami-rajat> jungleboyj: i think this needs to be abandoned https://review.openstack.org/#/c/634866/ .
16:27:59 <whoami-rajat> but hemna_  already left a comment there regarding the same so its good.
16:28:27 <hemna_> yah that nova patch shouldn't land
16:29:22 <jungleboyj> Ok.  Good.
16:29:34 <jungleboyj> So, I think we can move on to the questions about the RSD Connector.
16:30:17 <jungleboyj> #topic Concerns with the RSD connector
16:30:33 <whoami-rajat> hemna_:  since you abandoned your change regarding removing the nvmeof connector name, why are we still keeping it?
16:30:51 <hemna_> url?
16:31:16 <whoami-rajat> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/642860/
16:31:19 <hemna_> why are we keeping what?
16:31:35 <hemna_> I'm not clear what you are asking sorry
16:31:36 <jungleboyj> whoami-rajat:  That was abandoned.
16:31:49 <hemna_> I abandoned that one yesterday
16:31:53 <whoami-rajat> initiator name*
16:32:05 <hemna_> so there is some confusion here
16:32:32 <jungleboyj> Right.
16:32:33 <hemna_> the protocol name returned by initialize_connection calls is how nova looks up which connector to use in os-brcik
16:32:57 <hemna_> the nova nvmeof libvirt volume driver had hard coded to use the nvme connector in os-brick
16:33:06 <hemna_> because there wasn't one for nvmeof
16:33:23 <whoami-rajat> right
16:33:28 <hemna_> so the patch to add the nvmeof support in os-brick is actually ok
16:33:44 <hemna_> but we should eventually update nova to use the nvmeof connector in os-brick
16:34:00 <hemna_> the problem is that we have 2 protocols pointing to the same connector
16:34:09 <whoami-rajat> hemna_:  but there isn't a connector for nvmeof
16:34:11 <hemna_> which creates confusion from an os-brick side of things
16:34:19 <hemna_> correct
16:34:41 <hemna_> so I think we need to put some comments about it in code to explain.  it sux0rs
16:34:50 <hemna_> I'm not sure we can remove the nvme protocol mapping
16:35:09 <hemna_> once a protocol is in os-brick I don't think it can ever be removed safely
16:35:21 <whoami-rajat> hemna_: so we can update nova to use protocol name (that is nvmeof returned by cinder) rather than hardcoded NVME initiator name then we can rename the connector in os-brick?
16:35:33 <hemna_> re: detaching a volume that's been attached would fail
16:35:45 <hemna_> whoami-rajat:yah
16:35:59 <jungleboyj> whoami-rajat:  But can we rename the connector in os-brick?
16:36:11 <jungleboyj> Don't we have to keep nvme and nvmeof now.
16:36:16 <hemna_> sure, as long as the mapping is updated too
16:36:23 <hemna_> the mapping has to stay
16:36:41 <jungleboyj> Oh, but we can change the connector and just update the mapping.
16:37:08 <hemna_> and by mapping, I mean this: https://github.com/openstack/os-brick/blob/master/os_brick/initiator/connector.py#L122-L125
16:37:31 <jungleboyj> #link https://github.com/openstack/os-brick/blob/master/os_brick/initiator/connector.py#L122-L125
16:37:44 <hemna_> would there ever be a reason to have nvme vs nvmeof connectors?
16:37:50 * hemna_ is nvme illiterate
16:38:04 * jungleboyj looks at davidsha
16:38:10 <jungleboyj> Do you guys know more here or e0ne
16:38:37 <davidsha> just so I'm clear, this is updating the nvme connector to nvmeof and also keeping nvme to support backwards compatibility?
16:38:44 <e0ne> honestly, I don't remember why do we have two connectors
16:38:46 <hemna_> if all we are doing is renaming NVMeConnector to NVMeOFConnector, then I'm not sure what the point of that would be
16:39:05 <whoami-rajat> hemna_:  nvmeof is the cloud version of nvme protocol i think. same as SCSI and iSCSI
16:39:15 <hemna_> err
16:39:29 <hemna_> SCSI and iSCSI are 2 totally different things, not sure that's a good analogy
16:39:40 <hemna_> anyway, os-brick actually only has 1 connector
16:39:49 <hemna_> that supports both the nvme and nvmeof protocol mappings
16:39:55 <hemna_> so I don't think os-brick needs to change
16:40:19 <hemna_> what is confusing is that cinder drivers are returning 'nvmeof' to nova (initialize_connection)
16:40:29 <hemna_> and nova says....hey, I'll use nvme connector in os-brick
16:40:35 <hemna_> because nvmeof doesn't exist....or didn't.
16:40:57 <hemna_> so, shit os-brick with the mapping as is
16:41:19 <whoami-rajat> hemna_: i meant the relation between SCSI and iSCSI.
16:41:21 <hemna_> then next release, update nova to use the initiator.NVMEOF constant when constructing the connector.
16:41:23 <hemna_> that's it.
16:41:44 <hemna_> or not, either way it works
16:41:47 <jungleboyj> Oh, ship os-brick as is.
16:41:49 <hemna_> it's just confusing
16:42:01 * jungleboyj was trying to process that.
16:42:03 <davidsha> Oh, thats meant to be ship
16:42:08 <hemna_> jungleboyj:yah I don't see the point in renaming the connector object itself
16:42:29 <jungleboyj> davidsha:  Yes.  I thought he was just really pissed about os-brick's state.
16:42:31 <hemna_> unless we are simply trying to align everything with nvmeof
16:42:51 <jungleboyj> Do we have anyone who is an nvmeof expert?
16:43:28 <e0ne> jungleboyj: I'll ask Intel and Mellanox team who worked on nvmeof
16:44:16 <jungleboyj> So, actually, as I am looking around here, I don't know that whoami-rajat 's analogy is wrong.
16:44:53 <jungleboyj> NVME is the name for the protocol to talk to the hardware while NVMEoF is like iSCSI where it can be accessed remotely over the network.
16:45:04 <jungleboyj> #link https://storpool.com/blog/demystifying-what-is-nvmeof
16:45:23 <jungleboyj> So, we really should never have let the NVME protocol patch merge.
16:46:14 <jungleboyj> We can't fix that though, because it has been out in the wild for some time now.
16:46:16 <e0ne> we've got SPDK drivere with: pool["storage_protocol"] = 'NVMe-oF'
16:46:39 <whoami-rajat> NVMe was developed for SSD's since AHCI was too slow for them, so we have NVMeoF as a TCP/IP alternative of iSCSI.
16:46:54 <jungleboyj> whoami-rajat:  Right.
16:47:33 <jungleboyj> So, to be truly correct the NVME drivers should use NVMEoF for the connector.
16:47:41 <hemna_> so the protocol that I'm talking about is what is returned as part of initialize_connection
16:47:56 <hemna_> the protocol is actually the contents of the driver_volume_type
16:47:58 <hemna_> https://github.com/openstack/cinder/blob/master/cinder/volume/targets/nvmeof.py#L63
16:48:22 <hemna_> not the capabilities as being reported by get_volume_stats()
16:48:24 <e0ne> #link https://github.com/openstack/cinder/blob/master/cinder/volume/drivers/spdk.py#L109
16:48:26 <jungleboyj> hemna_:  And that is correct.
16:48:40 <hemna_> 2 completely different unrelated things
16:49:11 <hemna_> the driver_volume_type field is sent to nova/os-brick to lookup the correct connector object to handle the connect/disconnect calls for a volume
16:50:13 <whoami-rajat> hemna_: oh, yeah different context.
16:50:38 <jungleboyj> So, it would seem to me that what you are saying hemna_  is right.  Really os-brick should changed to have an NVMeoFConnector and the mappings should be updated and we will have to leave the NVME mapping for backwards compatibility.
16:51:15 <hemna_> I can rename the connector if so desired
16:51:17 <hemna_> that's easy
16:51:22 <hemna_> but not sure the value of it
16:51:28 <davidsha> So nvme would be removed for the V or X release then?
16:51:33 <hemna_> other than consistency in the code
16:51:38 <hemna_> davidsha:no
16:51:41 <hemna_> we can't remove it
16:51:41 <jungleboyj> In the future when new protocols come along we should better understand them before merging.
16:51:54 <davidsha> kk, understood
16:52:06 <hemna_> the mapping from nvme will have to exist forever
16:52:08 <whoami-rajat> hemna_: i think lack of consistency created a lot of confusion currently.
16:52:14 <hemna_> but it'll just point to the nvmeof connector
16:52:21 <hemna_> whoami-rajat:yah I agree
16:52:45 <jungleboyj> whoami-rajat:  ++
16:52:51 <hemna_> ok, so I'll put up a review to rename the NVMeConnector to NVMeOFConnector
16:53:09 <jungleboyj> And we should add a note here https://github.com/openstack/os-brick/blob/master/os_brick/initiator/connector.py#L122-L125
16:53:14 <jungleboyj> Explaining why the two mappings.
16:53:20 <hemna_> sure
16:53:30 <jungleboyj> hemna_: That, however doesn't need to go in to os-brick 2.8.1 .
16:53:45 <hemna_> yah, it's not a critical change
16:53:50 <hemna_> it works as is now
16:54:03 <whoami-rajat> once the nova code is changed, we can remove the NVME initiator right?
16:54:05 <jungleboyj> Ok.  Good.  I feel I better understand the situation now.
16:54:14 <jungleboyj> whoami-rajat:  No.
16:54:32 <hemna_> nova isn't the only service that uses os-brick
16:54:37 <hemna_> cinder does too
16:54:54 <jungleboyj> whoami-rajat: We can't be guaranteed that some other consumer isn't using NVME.
16:55:07 <hemna_> as does the cinderclient with the brick extension (for bare metal attaches)
16:55:07 <whoami-rajat> hemna_: and we're using NVME initiator in spdk only?
16:55:28 <hemna_> spdk uses nvmeof protocol afaik
16:55:52 <whoami-rajat> hemna_: for copy_image_to_volume and copy_volume_to_image
16:55:57 <hemna_> also, it's possible that we can have an old nova (using nvme) with a newer os-brick
16:56:08 <jungleboyj> #action hemna_  To update NVMeConnector to NVMeOFConnector  and add notes on why there are two mappings.
16:56:54 <jungleboyj> So, I think we should wrap this up and can finish discussion in channel if necessary.
16:57:00 <davidsha> hemna_: could you ask Nova to put a cap on the version of os-brick it uses in the stable branches?
16:57:09 <hemna_> coolio, now that everyone is completely confused :)
16:57:13 <jungleboyj> geguileo:  Also wanted to cover a topic.
16:57:24 <jungleboyj> hemna_:  I think we are less confused?
16:57:43 <hemna_> are you sure you are not confused about being confused?
16:57:54 <hemna_> :P
16:57:54 <jungleboyj> hemna_:  :-p
16:57:55 <whoami-rajat> hemna_: lol
16:58:06 <jungleboyj> geguileo:  Are you around?
16:58:10 <geguileo> jungleboyj: yup
16:58:21 <jungleboyj> #topic cinderlib update
16:58:26 <jungleboyj> You have 2 minutes.
16:58:36 <geguileo> Next week is the RC1 target week, and for Cinderlib we need to add the publish-to-pypi job
16:58:38 <geguileo> #link https://review.openstack.org/643013
16:59:02 <geguileo> I've also found some bugs in cinderlib
16:59:13 <geguileo> It would be great to these 4 fixes in the repo:
16:59:14 <geguileo> #link https://review.openstack.org/643015
16:59:16 <geguileo> #link https://review.openstack.org/643016
16:59:18 <geguileo> #link https://review.openstack.org/643017
16:59:20 <geguileo> #link https://review.openstack.org/643018
16:59:28 <geguileo> And less urgent would be the devstack patch, that will allow us to add cinderlib's functional tests to Cinder jobs:
16:59:29 <geguileo> #link https://review.openstack.org/643014
16:59:39 <jungleboyj> Ok.
16:59:43 <geguileo> Aaaan we have 20 seconds left
16:59:45 <geguileo> XD
16:59:51 <jungleboyj> Yay!
17:00:07 <jungleboyj> Ok.  Thanks for the update.  Will take a look at your patches.
17:00:12 <geguileo> thanks!
17:00:18 <jungleboyj> And time is up.
17:00:37 <jungleboyj> I will be watching the os-brick patches and pushing up a new release as soon as everything has merged.
17:00:46 <hemna_> sweet
17:00:49 <jungleboyj> Sorry for the mess there and thanks to everyone for the help.
17:01:13 <jungleboyj> If there are more items to discuss. Lets talk in the CInder channel.
17:01:16 <jungleboyj> Thanks!
17:01:20 <martinkennelly> thanks !
17:01:22 <jungleboyj> #endmeeting