17:00:41 #startmeeting ironic 17:00:41 Meeting started Mon Aug 8 17:00:41 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is devananda. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:42 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:44 The meeting name has been set to 'ironic' 17:00:45 o/ 17:00:46 hi folks! i'm standing in for jroll as he's had to go AFK unexpectedly 17:00:49 o/ 17:00:50 o/ 17:00:57 o/ 17:00:58 o/ 17:00:59 o/ 17:01:00 o/ 17:01:00 o/ 17:01:12 o/ 17:01:14 o/ 17:01:19 o/ 17:01:27 o/ 17:01:31 as usual, our agenda can be found here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Ironic 17:01:37 o/ 17:01:39 today looks fairly light 17:01:43 #chair NobodyCam 17:01:44 Current chairs: NobodyCam devananda 17:01:47 o/ 17:01:49 o/ 17:02:03 #topic announcements 17:02:31 I believe jroll plans to cut 6.1.0 this week, pending the gate getting fixed 17:02:43 oops, I should info that 17:02:51 #info jroll plans to cut 6.1.0 release this week 17:02:56 o/ 17:03:11 also, I see an announcement form TheJulia (thanks for putting on the wiki!) 17:03:15 #info The driver composition defaults call will be this Wednesday at 4PM UTC. Bridge #7777 17:03:42 gate should be fixed soon, g-r update for the os-client-config is on review already 17:03:53 o/ 17:04:02 vdrok: that's great, thanks! 17:04:36 lots of our netwon-critical work landed last week - let's finish polishing those with follow ups in the next few days 17:04:40 anyone else have announcements to share? 17:05:32 ok, moving on 17:05:34 #topic subteam status reports 17:05:35 o/ 17:05:38 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IronicWhiteBoard 17:05:58 please take a minute or two to update your sections -- the status report starts around line 80 17:08:21 jlvillal: anything change in our gate tests (jobs promoted or removed) last week? 17:08:24 oh.. so there is a chance that the serial console will land in newton? i see that the -2 was removed from nova patch. 17:08:43 rloo: oh? I think that would be fantastic 17:08:48 devananda: Last week the python-ironicclient had functional tests added as a voting job 17:09:10 devananda: yeah, how did that happen? 17:09:34 rloo: not sure? 17:09:40 devananda, rloo yes! jroll just pointed me to it today 17:09:45 Not sure if anyone else knows about gate changes related to us. 17:10:14 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/328157/ 17:10:26 well, let's review that nova patch and help get it in! ^ 17:10:37 rloo, ++ 17:11:01 any oneview folks here? i thought i saw a bunch of oneview-related patches get merged. but i don't see any status 17:11:22 thiagop: xavierr: you guys there? 17:11:52 I am 17:12:27 rloo: was helping infra folks here, didn't have time to update the whiteboard 17:12:41 doing it now 17:13:24 * devananda is looking for jroll's nova mulitcompute patch 17:14:01 devananda: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/348443/ 17:14:08 rloo: done 17:14:21 thx thiagop 17:14:49 mat128: got it -t hanks 17:15:06 updates look good, thanks everyone! 17:15:49 the bugs stats hasn't been updated? 17:15:57 dtantsur is out sick today 17:17:48 going to move on, but feel free to continue updating the whiteboard 17:18:15 #topic discussion: API v2? 17:18:43 I didn't plan on running the meeting and also introducing the only topic on the agenda ... but here we go :) 17:19:01 back at the last summit, and then again at the midcycle, the topic of a possible v2 API was brought up 17:19:12 I took the action item of drafting a detailed "problem description" 17:19:22 with the goal of presenting that at the barcelona summit 17:19:31 I've written up many of hte points here: 17:19:33 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ironic-v2-api 17:19:38 and would like to solicit feedback and discussion 17:19:59 I'll cap this at 20 minutes during hte meeting today so there's time for open discussion too 17:20:28 there are 13 problems identified so far, listed in that 'pad in no particular order 17:20:32 * lucasagomes looks 17:20:34 devananda: wow awesome work 17:20:42 devananda: At the nova mid-cycle, it was suggested by some nova folks that instead of a true v2 API, we just add more things to v1 and cycle out old 17:20:55 JayF: yep 17:21:16 one of the things that has stood out ot me, as I've documented these "problems" is that a lot of them appear to be things we _could_ fix incrmentally 17:21:21 devananda: I know that's more abuot the journey than the destination, but I'm curious if this is intended to be a "true v2" API version change or just a general document on where we want the api to evolve to 17:21:34 devananda: awesome =D 17:21:58 JayF: this document is not intedted to be a description of where we want to end up, or how we get there 17:22:21 devananda: just sorta a "list of issues with v1 api" then? 17:22:23 merely "here are the usability / operability pain points we've seen" 17:22:24 yes 17:22:39 if we don't describe the problems we want to fix, we can't fix them 17:22:46 ++ 17:22:58 conversely, if we all agree on what the problems are, we can then have a good discusison on how to fix them 17:23:09 just a little curious about the wording, b/c we keep calling this a v2 api effort which sounds maybe a little heavier than what it is today :) 17:23:20 JayF: API-next ;D 17:23:21 JayF: agreed 17:23:33 I'm calling it v2 because that is what we called it at the last two meetings 17:23:40 but I agree that it may not actually become /v2/ 17:23:53 it might be v1.99 ... dunno :) 17:24:42 if you've faced one of the problems listed there, please add a +1. if you don't think it's a problem, please -1 and explain why. 17:30:16 mat128: indeed, it's more like #6, thanks 17:30:22 :) 17:31:52 I see some folks discussing on the pad - thanks! 17:32:11 I also want to ask, specifically, are any of the things desribed there NOT problems for someone? 17:32:43 well #7 was odd for me (callback vs long-polling) 17:33:03 I do not feel it as a problem, if the intent is really using ironic via curl, a callback is probably even harder 17:33:18 mat128: fair point 17:33:28 callbacks are useful for intra-service coordination, but not for client-server 17:33:30 long-polling (a la nova's '--poll') feels like the easiest way out 17:33:30 I think that once we have tasks, polling becomes cheaper... 17:34:06 so if I take thiagop's proposal, nova could create a deployment task and nova would track it's progress? 17:34:11 optionally having a callback on it? 17:34:52 then I guess Ironic could emit notifications (like nova's instance.create.start/end/error) and it's 'just' a matter of catching those (i know, i know.. not that easy ;)) 17:35:49 mat128: that would improve the nova.virt.ironic driver significantly: rather than polling ironic continuously during the deploy, it could sleep / listen for an event or callback 17:36:05 as Nova does with Neutron now for some port actions 17:36:26 maybe an hybrid solution? Tasks to track and notifications once the task is done, than a consumer may not need to poll the API, just listen the bus for the task... 17:37:19 The consumer can't be expected to have access to the message bus, if the consumer in the context is an end user with an api client 17:37:35 TheJulia is correct 17:37:54 uhmm 17:38:23 the internal rabbit message bus is not suitable for communicating with non-service clients 17:38:44 might work for nova, but not for other purposes (that may continue polling...) 17:38:54 devananda: agreed, but I fear this turns into a "if you're not a service, there are some parts of Ironic you cannot use" 17:38:57 or we can come up with another solution :) 17:39:21 mat128: indeed... 17:39:26 mat128: Sure, but are you going to configure your Ironic APIs to allow callbacks to arbitrary URLs? I certainly won't... 17:39:59 JayF: nope 17:40:01 That's my concern, right? I don't want to have internal details of my ironic-apis leaking out 17:40:15 JayF: even if I wanted, ir-api won't be able to reach anyone 17:40:20 exactly 17:40:28 other than bus/db for ir-cond communications 17:40:43 but if Ironic starts emitting notifications like node.deploy.end 17:40:51 as a regular API user I can't "catch" those 17:40:52 Yep, exactly. And I would not want my individual apis spitting out api calls back to callers 17:40:54 JayF: might not be that hard, what's harder is assuming/expect/demand that a consumer service will have that sort of "arbitrary endpoint" to be notified 17:40:59 and giving up their internal ip addresses, etc 17:41:26 mat128: I see that as a /good thing/ 17:41:51 thank you all for the feedback. I'd like to cap this discussion in a couple minutes, though I'm happy to continue after the meeting / in the 'pad 17:41:58 if you'd like to have a longer focused discussion on this before the summit, please add your name to the list at the top of the pad 17:42:11 JayF: thats fine, but if tomorrow we remove the node field for deployment status, the *only* way to get it becomes the notification 17:42:18 devananda: ok sorry :) 17:42:21 I will collate all this into a spec about two weeks before the summit 17:42:31 mat128: no appology needed :) 17:42:52 I'm just making sure we have time for open discusssion 17:42:55 mat128: that's why we shouldn't do that, lol 17:43:43 #topic open discussion 17:45:24 I, for one, am really looking forward to the remainder of this cycle. we've got so many great features almost done right now :) 17:45:41 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/340596/ 3-line patch with some tests that will make our CI happier! If someone can take a look (without rush now) :) 17:46:03 hi everyone, we would like to get some feedback https://review.openstack.org/#/c/350570/ :-) Besides the spelling and wakeonlan, how can we improve the ref ? 17:46:10 thiagop: that's failing oneview ci right now though 17:46:43 As I emailed the list about last week; I'm going to abandon any ironic-specs with no updates in the last six months. I'll do that immediately after this meeting so if you have an objection speak now :) 17:47:03 JayF: that failure was due to our gitlab problems last week 17:47:04 chopmann: interesting 17:47:21 JayF: but I can recheck 17:47:28 thiagop: I'd love to see that passing before voting +2 on a patch affecting that driver 17:47:30 chopmann: so you turned that idea into a spec, good :) 17:47:34 we proposed the ref some time back, we were working on a poc 17:47:50 Question somewhat related to metrics: Do we have a definiative list and/or timeline for when drivers being dropped out of tree this cycle are being dropped/ 17:47:53 and understanding more of openstack :p 17:47:56 chopmann: describing the changes would be good 17:48:02 Mainly I'm trying to avoid writing metrics for drivers that are going to fall out of tree soon 17:48:15 chopmann: the first things that come to my mind are, beyond a new boot and deploy driver, and a new ramdisk, are there other changes you'd need? 17:48:47 JayF: I believe jroll plans on sendin email about dropping drivers early this week 17:48:57 but I do not recall the timeline to actually remove them, sorry 17:49:06 Along those lines, we do need to change our ipmitool jobs to voting 17:49:20 is anyone working on stabilizing them? Or has anyone looked at metrics around passing % of them lately? 17:49:24 the thing with the ramdisk is: "black-box" switches or embedded devices rarely have a ramdisk 17:49:39 JayF, I have to look at that yes 17:50:01 lucasagomes: IMO we probably should just make them voting now, at least for ironic projects, and feel the pain if they fail 17:50:10 lucasagomes: otherwise it'll be deprioritized naturally 17:50:21 chopmann: you could no-op the boot phase, and hvae the deploy phase write the new firmware 17:50:31 lucasagomes: and use that pain to improve the jobs before pushing them to other projects (like nova) 17:50:33 ^ exactly 17:50:42 #info I'm doing a patch to remove our (out of date) tests from tempest for good 17:50:46 JayF: +1 to making it voting so we need to fix it 17:50:58 JayF, yeah that would def help 17:51:08 JayF: also +1 to doing tat before we get too close to FF / end of cycle 17:51:09 chopmann: I commented in your review, but I'd like to know more about the devices that this driver will support, along with new tests required 17:51:23 I was unable to work on it last week, but plan to resume it later today 17:51:28 We should leave ssh jobs running until after we have the nova tests moved off them, right? 17:51:33 btw, someone knows where's is jarrod (from pyghmi) ? 17:52:06 lucasagomes: honestly, I have a little concern about virtualbmc being a dep of our tests with a project with a SPOF as a major piece :x 17:52:06 chopmann: another thing to point out - for in-tree drivers, we will require either the ability to do CI testing in a virtualized environment using entirely open source components, or third-party CI jobs 17:52:10 devananda: no-op would be fine i guess. "Power Control" neeeds to be optional too (no-op) or with a second device ("remote power") 17:52:13 lucasagomes: because of you having to ask questions like that. 17:52:44 thiagop, code-wise it looks good, but that said, it would be good to have a bug ticket for that problem as well :-) 17:52:46 devananda: got that. :-) 17:53:08 JayF: lucasagomes: does anyone else understand virtualbmc well enough to fix/update it without jarrod? 17:53:11 chopmann: awesome 17:53:19 we'll do our best for it to be open-testable 17:53:27 lucasagomes: will do 17:53:36 chopmann: it's (now) a requirement for an in-tree driver 17:53:42 s/an/any/ 17:53:42 JayF, yeah it's concerning... I was thinking whether we could take ownwership of pyghmi as part of the ironic project really 17:53:43 chopmann: perhaps you could describe, in the spec, what the provisioning workflow will look like for this class of hardware 17:54:06 devananda, virtualbmc is rather simple, the bulk of the logic converting the IPMI commands lives in pyghmi 17:54:15 lucasagomes: I think devananda's question is telling: do we have enough expertise in that realm to manage it? 17:54:24 lucasagomes: I certainly don't :/ 17:54:27 chopmann: I can probably help you as we have shared mid-term goals 17:54:42 lucasagomes: ah. thx for the clarification - I mean the whole stack that we need to do that testing 17:54:55 JayF, I don't either. I've fixed a couple of things in pyghmi but it's not near enough to say I'm an expert on it 17:55:05 mat128: what are those goals? :-) 17:55:06 lucasagomes, devananda: what's the current problem with pyghmi? 17:55:15 chopmann: appliance provisioning 17:55:20 blackbox mostly 17:55:25 ahh :-) 17:55:41 mat128: its development is not managed by anyone on the ironic core team 17:56:00 mat128, there's only one maintainer at the moment 17:56:06 ah 17:56:09 though I do have commit rights on the project, I don't claim to understand it enough to meaningfully review / contribute to it 17:56:11 and I'm not sure anybody else has a good understanding of that code base 17:56:17 it's really just jarrod right now 17:56:47 so making that a required component in ironic's gate is raising some concerns 17:57:34 mat128: i'll get back to you later this week. Once we had our team meeting :-) 17:57:42 one guy on my team and I can handle the IPMI stuff if all you need is more ironic presence in there, but not sure that help getting ir-core people onboard 17:58:05 s/help/helps 17:58:06 mat128: at least from my perspective, the concern is SPOF, not that "all of us can't do it" 17:58:18 JayF: yeah 17:58:29 mat128: thanks. that would make me feel more comfortable 17:58:30 if we have 2/3 regular contributors, in addition to jarrod, working on it, most of my concerns are alliviated 17:58:41 * JayF doesn't mention the self-merge that happens constantly in that project :/ 17:58:50 JayF: don't tell me about it :( 17:58:56 we call it insta-merge here 17:59:15 but thanks to lucasagomes we have the virtualbmc gate running 17:59:18 JayF, I would like to add console support for virtualbmc, that will require changes in pyghmi 17:59:24 1 minute 17:59:28 I probably will understand it more once I start playing with it 17:59:35 lucasagomes: I think we can submit those 17:59:38 (patches) 18:00:15 lucasagomes, mat128: let's start a discussion with jarrod about adding more cores to that project 18:00:21 devananda, ++ 18:00:44 we're at time - thanks everyone! 18:00:56 #endmeeting