14:04:44 <jbernard> #startmeeting cinder
14:04:45 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Wed Oct 22 14:04:44 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is jbernard. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:04:45 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:04:45 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'cinder'
14:04:52 <jbernard> courtesy ping: jungleboyj rosmaita smcginnis tosky whoami-rajat m5z e0ne geguileo eharney jbernard hemna fabiooliveira yuval tobias-urdin adiare happystacker dosaboy hillpd msaravan sp-bmilanov Luzi sfernand simondodsley  zaubea nileshthathagar flelain wizardbit agalica
14:04:57 <jbernard> #topic roll call
14:05:01 <jbernard> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-gazpacho-meetings
14:05:03 <agalica> o/
14:05:04 <rosmaita> o/
14:05:06 <hemna> mep
14:05:08 <hvlcchao1> o/
14:05:10 <yuval> 0/
14:05:12 <jbernard> o/
14:05:16 <erlon> \o
14:06:19 <jungleboyj> o/
14:06:29 <raineszm> o/
14:06:31 <whoami-rajat> hi
14:06:40 <opendevreview> Eric Harney proposed openstack/cinder master: WIP: image_utils: Detect missing device before calling qemu-img convert  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/964541
14:07:27 <raineszm> I hope I wasn't too presumptuous in adding an entry for today's meeting.
14:07:44 <jbernard> raineszm: not at all, that is what you're supposed to do
14:08:20 <raineszm> great. ty
14:08:25 <jbernard> welcome everyone
14:08:30 <jbernard> #topic annoucements
14:08:37 <jbernard> really quickly, next week is PTG
14:09:08 <jbernard> im working on finalizing the scheudle, but roughly we will have tuesday and wednesday for topics
14:09:34 <jbernard> thurs and fri can be used for collaborative reveiws, which will probably be more helpful than anything else
14:09:42 <jbernard> we have a few cross project sessions
14:10:06 <jbernard> there is an eventlet removal session on tuesday (across all projects)
14:10:19 <jbernard> wednesday we have a nova/cinder and a nova/cinder/ironic session
14:10:38 <jbernard> it looks like the nova/cinder/glance (encryption api) cross project will be on thursday
14:10:44 <jbernard> (waiting for final word from cyril)
14:11:33 <jbernard> most of the sessions will be concentrated between 1400 to 1700 UTC
14:12:02 <jbernard> im not sure if we want to try meetpad again (over google) but we can sort that out later
14:12:25 <jbernard> historicaly ive had trouble with the recordings, but that's most probably my fault
14:13:15 <jbernard> that's about all, i will send out a mail with more details and update the etherpad
14:13:20 <rosmaita> well, if the recordings are important, we should use whatever makes recording most reliable
14:13:36 <jbernard> that, i think, is why we've reverted to goolge in the past
14:13:55 <rosmaita> yep
14:13:57 <jbernard> it works, but it's different from what most others are doing
14:14:17 <jbernard> and can create some confusion, but i dont think it's signficant
14:14:18 <jayaanand> hi
14:14:19 <rosmaita> when was the last time we used meetpad? i don't remember
14:14:24 <erlon> If it would be nice if it was possible to get automated notes on those. Not sure if you guys have tried that before, but it's pretty handful the times I used
14:14:35 <jbernard> last ptg we tried initially
14:14:43 <jbernard> and failed and switch back to google
14:15:09 <jbernard> erlon: i think i can enable gemini to take notes from the live sessions
14:15:13 <erlon> Does meat pad supports automated notes?
14:15:16 <jbernard> erlon: is that what you mean?
14:15:35 <erlon> yeah, that's what I used on google meets
14:15:57 <jbernard> if we use google then i think it's straightforward, i need to look into meetpad if we try to go that route
14:17:18 <jbernard> that's all i have for annoucements, questions about next week?
14:17:28 <rosmaita> i must admit that i haven't been paying attention, is meetpad currently the preferred PTG meeting software?
14:17:37 <rosmaita> i notice that starlingx is using linux foundation zoom
14:17:43 <erlon> Are you organizing the schedule and planning for the ptg anywere (etherpad, docs)?
14:18:43 <erlon> Zoom also has meeting notes feature
14:18:44 <jbernard> we have a planning etherpad (https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/2026.1-ptg-cinder-planning) quite sparse at the moment, i will be transferring notes and shedule to the proper etherpad today
14:20:40 <jbernard> let me just say, if anything comes up just ask in the channel
14:20:59 <jbernard> most things are open to discussion and i welcome all input
14:21:33 <jbernard> #topic stable releases
14:21:43 <jbernard> rosmaita: just wanted to check in with you, how is that going?
14:21:49 <jbernard> do you need anythign from me?
14:22:37 <rosmaita> just need +1s on the patches :D
14:22:58 <jbernard> ok, will do
14:23:08 <rosmaita> so, at this point, no more merges into Caracal, that is, stable/2024.1
14:23:27 <jbernard> i think we landed everything we were targeting, no?
14:23:34 <rosmaita> yep
14:23:51 <rosmaita> there are no open non-WIP patches
14:24:16 <rosmaita> and i guess i should abandon all of them
14:25:08 <jbernard> yeah, else they just clutter the dashboard
14:25:08 <rosmaita> that's all from me
14:25:39 <jbernard> rosmaita: thanks for all of it!
14:25:43 <opendevreview> Merged openstack/cinder stable/2024.2: [Pure Storage] Manage Volume from GUI fails  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/944301
14:25:44 <rosmaita> np
14:25:46 <opendevreview> Merged openstack/cinder stable/2024.2: [Pure Storage] Fix issue with LACP ports not being identified  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/945785
14:26:35 <jayaanand> we have multiple back-porting patches from NetApp. Can someone take a look
14:26:40 <jayaanand> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/956755
14:26:40 <jayaanand> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/959293
14:27:04 <jayaanand> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/961431
14:27:04 <jayaanand> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/961432
14:27:18 <jbernard> #topic rbd driver blocksize
14:27:26 <jbernard> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/658283
14:27:40 <jbernard> raineszm: that's you i believe
14:27:50 <raineszm> So this is an /old/ patch that stalled out but is probably worth reviving.
14:28:03 <jbernard> jayaanand: if they're just review requests, put them in the etherpad
14:28:18 <raineszm> The basic question that seem to have come up that stalled the review was that there was a question about where to add the new options.
14:28:22 <jayaanand> sure than you!
14:28:40 <jbernard> raineszm: i vaguely remember - why can't we make it an option at the driver level instead of just rbd?
14:28:55 <raineszm> That seems like a good idea long term.
14:29:08 <raineszm> The only concern is how to handle the other drivers that already have an analogous option
14:29:22 <jbernard> hmm, do you have an example?
14:29:23 <raineszm> So there's combination of refactor and new feature there
14:29:48 <raineszm> yes 1 sec
14:29:49 <hemna> +A'd
14:31:32 <erlon> How common is this option across the drivers? Is this a libvirt feature that can be used by any backend?
14:31:48 <raineszm> Yes. So any driver can set the metadata
14:31:54 <raineszm> and libvirt picks it up
14:32:22 <raineszm> the solidfire driver has implemented it in the past I think
14:32:27 <raineszm> just trying to find a permalink
14:32:57 <erlon> Are the connectors (nfs, iscsi, fc) already passing that to libvirt on the nova side?
14:34:23 <raineszm> It seems so. So basically the logical_block_size and physical_block_size have default values that are advertised
14:34:27 <raineszm> in the connection data
14:34:46 <raineszm> the addition here is to allow setting those as an option
14:35:37 <raineszm> At least one other driver sets those by querying the disk geometry
14:36:08 <raineszm> Currently in the icsci driver it seems
14:36:40 <raineszm> https://opendev.org/openstack/cinder/src/commit/d02171164bdd702b12b59888b744d172f30d712d/cinder/volume/targets/iscsi.py#L127
14:38:09 <erlon> right, I see that in nova. I think my concern would be mostly related to the ability to backport this fix if we increase its scope
14:38:14 <raineszm> and here https://opendev.org/openstack/cinder/src/commit/d02171164bdd702b12b59888b744d172f30d712d/cinder/volume/driver.py#L2782 in the driver base
14:39:13 <erlon> What I like that idea to have this re-used across all drivers
14:40:35 <raineszm> I agree. I think that long term it should be moved to the driver level
14:40:57 <raineszm> The question is whether to do that combined with the fix for rbd or to do it in two steps
14:41:21 <raineszm> The motivation for the original patch being that it allows to fix performance issues with rbd and windows vms
14:42:43 <raineszm> jbernard: what do you think?
14:42:44 <erlon> yes, and I like the way the options are put in pairs like 512e -> "4096 512", it seems more meaningful too the user.
14:43:00 <jbernard> i lean towards doing it once, even if it takes a bit more (at the driver layer)
14:44:17 <erlon> How about backporting? It will be bigger
14:44:53 <jbernard> that is true, but it's not impossible, especially if care is taken in writing and review
14:45:07 <erlon> But apparently not impossible.
14:45:09 <erlon> :)
14:45:14 <erlon> yeah, agreed
14:45:19 <raineszm> Haha. Okay. Fair.
14:45:32 <raineszm> Yeah I'm game to hoist it up to the driver level.
14:45:43 <raineszm> If that's what we want to do
14:45:43 <jbernard> my sense is that faster fixes that require followup, more often than not, never get said followup
14:45:43 <erlon> If we can make it back to Caracal, I think I can make it happen
14:46:38 <raineszm> I'll start taking a look at that then.
14:46:50 <raineszm> thanks for chatting in through.
14:46:53 <raineszm> *it
14:47:04 <jbernard> np, thanks for working on it
14:47:28 <erlon> lets discuss more details on the option naming in the ptg
14:47:32 <jbernard> sure
14:48:01 <jbernard> #topic open discussion
14:48:16 <erlon> \o
14:48:34 <tobias-urdin> can i shamelessly plug my (now old) open patches :) https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/cinder+status:open+owner:%22Tobias+Urdin%22
14:48:37 <agalica> jbernard: would it be possible to get cores assigned to our issues?  We have 3 issues we need to backport - targeting for december.  These are all important. One of them already has a core and another reviewer (and we're waiting on Rajat again on that one)
14:48:49 <erlon> just a nudge on whoami-rajat to get a look on the brick iscsi patch
14:49:11 <jbernard> tobias-urdin: you may :)
14:49:24 <agalica> tobias-urdin: do you need reviewers:  My team can review if you do
14:49:26 <agalica> non-core
14:49:36 <agalica> My patches are these: Replication:        https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/869991
14:49:36 <agalica> Snapshot Expansion: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/850830
14:49:36 <agalica> B20:                https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/959901
14:50:19 <agalica> whoami-rajat: Polite nudge here as well that we have updated our B20 patch with the changes that hopefully satisfy your comments
14:50:53 <jbernard> agalica: cores assigned, let me think on that. it's not been our practice in the past but maybe we can do something to get closer and improve turnaround
14:51:32 <jbernard> it's always voluntary of course, as this is open source, but maybe i can help coordinate better
14:51:39 <agalica> jbernard: thanks.  we're really struggling here, and no one seems to want to review.  we're already behind in that we were meant to get merged into 2025.1 and missed that.  Things are getting hot.
14:51:55 <tobias-urdin> thanks! they are quite old now but i think i rebased them recently, any feedback welcome :)
14:51:59 <agalica> we are happy to review many patches if tehre are
14:52:07 <agalica> ok tobias - any one in particular, or all of them?
14:52:18 <jbernard> agalica: ack
14:52:49 <erlon> @agalica the volume extend patch has a merge conflict. Can you rebase it?
14:53:00 <agalica> erlon: yes, we will do that today
14:53:06 <erlon> Volume Replication too
14:53:13 <agalica> ok, will do that today
14:53:44 <agalica> tobias-urden: do you have any specific patches you want reviewed in that list, or all of them?
14:54:55 <jbernard> agalica: i would go through them and review the ones that are passing ci without merge conflict
14:55:33 <agalica> ok, thanks - will do that
14:56:06 <wizardbit> Hey jbernard, were you able to get an update from Rajat on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-brick/+/955379 ?
14:56:46 <jbernard> whoami-rajat: ^
14:59:01 <wizardbit> That will ping him?
14:59:54 <jbernard> maybe ;)
15:00:31 <jbernard> it's quite late now, he may see it in his scrollback buffer
15:00:59 <jbernard> we should be able to address all of these in next week's meetings thoug
15:01:18 <jbernard> we're at time, anything else?
15:01:20 <Anoop_Shukla> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/956221
15:01:44 <jbernard> Anoop_Shukla: ack
15:01:53 <jbernard> ok, thank you everyone, see you next week
15:01:55 <jbernard> #endmeeting