16:01:59 #startmeeting nova 16:01:59 Meeting started Tue May 9 16:01:59 2023 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is bauzas. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:01:59 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:01:59 The meeting name has been set to 'nova' 16:02:21 sorry I'm late but some urgency came today that people will hear tomorrow 16:02:28 * bauzas tries to not spoil it too earlty 16:02:37 o/ 16:02:57 bauzas, you are teasing us. 16:02:59 o/ 16:03:04 o/ 16:04:00 o/ 16:04:24 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova#Agenda_for_next_meeting 16:04:40 gibi: can you please run the meeting now I'll jump back as soon as I can 16:04:42 ? 16:04:47 sure 16:05:00 gathering thoughts... 16:05:49 #topic Bugs (stuck/critical) 16:06:16 there is one critical bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2012993 16:06:42 the fix is up https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/882052 16:07:17 it has +A but we need to push it through the gate 16:07:22 yeah 16:07:33 it got a lot of ci failures, mostly on gate pipeline 16:08:15 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=New 15 new untriaged bugs (-3 since the last meeting) 16:08:43 thanks whoever had the baton this week 16:09:02 ahh I see, thanks Uggla 16:09:10 #info Add yourself in the team bug roster if you want to help https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-bug-triage-roster 16:09:23 Uggla: any bug worth to mention? 16:09:27 yep 16:09:57 just to say I looked at https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2016967 16:10:38 I discussed about it with Artom, I suggested to add tracing, so I will propose a little patch to do that, but I have not change the status of the bug. 16:10:56 s/I/Artom 16:11:22 Uggla: ack good idea 16:12:00 also I guess to _unshelve_server closure is useless, I will remove it and explain in another patch. 16:12:59 that's all for me. 16:13:21 thanks Uggla 16:13:27 #info bug baton is being passed to sean-k-mooney 16:13:34 sean-k-mooney: could you take it? 16:13:50 i should proably say no but sure ill try 16:13:58 thanks :) 16:14:24 is there any bug we need to discuss today? 16:15:26 the os-vif one i am working on is almost ready for wider review but ill ping people after the meeting once im happy with it. noting else i wanted ot highlight 16:16:09 thanks 16:16:11 just if we can merge the patches: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/879705 (Don't provide MTU value in metadata service if DHCP is enabled) 16:16:49 thatns the backport 16:16:54 I think I have backport patches down to train. 16:17:15 ack I see them lined up in https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:bug%252F1899487 16:17:22 that failed on ceph multi store it seams 16:17:34 but ya i agree it would be nice ot land that 16:18:04 yep at least if we can merged some of them, not to forget. 16:18:15 it still need ot merge on all the newer branches 16:18:38 yepp 16:18:46 oh so the zed patch still 16:18:51 has an open qustion form elodilles 16:19:11 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/877500/1/releasenotes/notes/Do-not-send-mtu-value-in-metadata-for-networks-with-enabled-dhcp-641506f2a13b540f.yaml 16:19:42 and if we can land this one also: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/868088 16:20:28 we should proably do a bug review day 16:20:28 sean-k-mooney, elodilles: I think it is fine to merge it with a minor bump 16:20:52 gibi: ack 16:20:56 we have a stable one schduled soon right? 16:21:15 sean-k-mooney: I'm not sure we have bug review day scheduled 16:21:24 actually if i'm not mistaken that day is today :) 16:21:28 I think we only scheduled spec review day 16:21:47 https://releases.openstack.org/bobcat/schedule.html#b-nova-stable-review-day 16:21:57 today :) 16:21:57 https://releases.openstack.org/bobcat/schedule.html#b-nova-stable-review-day 16:22:16 hupps, I totally missed that 16:22:17 i think that didnt happen 16:22:28 should we try again next week 16:22:34 we should 16:22:35 i reviewed some stable backport o:) 16:22:41 elodilles++ :) 16:22:42 elodilles++ 16:23:13 though i also had review duties with Bobcat-1 release patches :X 16:23:18 bauzas: could you make sure that we try the stable review day next week same day? 16:23:35 or elodilles ^^ 16:23:37 other things were on my mind so i forgot about this until now 16:23:55 it was a total blackout from my side 16:23:59 anyhow 16:24:00 moving on 16:24:13 i can ping the team here next Tuesday if that is what you mean gibi 16:24:19 on IRC 16:24:26 elodilles: that is exactly what I mean :) 16:24:29 thanks 16:24:31 \o/ 16:24:33 #topic Gate status 16:24:40 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=gate-failure Nova gate bugs 16:25:13 I'm not up to date with the gate status 16:25:21 but I saw https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1946339 happening again on couple of my patches 16:25:38 so I added fresh links there 16:25:45 *fresh job links 16:25:55 how others feel about the gate? 16:27:11 then I guess everything is acceptable 16:27:12 :) 16:27:26 #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?project=openstack%2Fnova&project=openstack%2Fplacement&pipeline=periodic-weekly Nova&Placement 16:27:45 periodics are green 16:27:57 #info Please look at the gate failures and file a bug report with the gate-failure tag. 16:28:01 #info STOP DOING BLIND RECHECKS aka. 'recheck' https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/testing.html#how-to-handle-test-failures 16:28:07 anything else about our gate? 16:29:16 then moving on 16:29:17 #topic Release Planning 16:29:21 #link https://releases.openstack.org/bobcat/schedule.html 16:29:26 #info Nova deadlines are set in the above schedule 16:29:30 #info Bobcat-1 is today 16:29:48 (* this week, rather) 16:29:49 elodilles: do you need any help from us to make B-1 happen? 16:29:57 elodilles: thanks, correct 16:30:01 gibi: i haven't seen any nova related patch 16:30:15 is it a good or a bad sign? :) 16:30:17 that means we don't have any merged (and unreleased) patches 16:30:34 in our libraries / clients 16:31:03 sounds good to me 16:31:21 #info Next Tuesday 16th is stable branches review day 16:31:24 if anyone aware of sg that needs to be released, then this is the time, though :) 16:31:43 gibi: thx! \o/ 16:31:46 elodilles: thanks 16:31:54 ++ 16:32:19 hm either somebody updated the agenda while we were talking about the stable review day or it was already delayed 16:32:24 elodilles: once the os-vif bug is fixed we will want to do a release pretty quickily i think but it does not need to be aligned to any milestone 16:32:43 sean-k-mooney: good point 16:32:55 sean-k-mooney: ACK, thanks for the heads up! 16:33:07 ping me and i can review it 16:33:09 its release wiht intermedirary so ill just submit the patch after the issue is fixed 16:33:15 ack 16:34:07 cool, any other topic about our releases? 16:34:53 then 16:34:54 #topic Review priorities 16:34:58 #link https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+(project:openstack/nova+OR+project:openstack/placement+OR+project:openstack/os-traits+OR+project:openstack/os-resource-classes+OR+project:openstack/os-vif+OR+project:openstack/python-novaclient+OR+project:openstack/osc-placement)+(label:Review-Priority%252B1+OR+label:Review-Priority%252B2) 16:35:04 #info As a reminder, cores eager to review changes can +1 to indicate their interest, +2 for committing to the review 16:35:07 just the usual :) 16:35:24 any comments? 16:36:13 then I'm passing the keyboard to elodilles 16:36:13 #topic Stable Branches 16:36:27 nothing to report, really, 16:36:33 so the usual: 16:36:36 #info stable branch status / gate failures tracking etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-branch-ci 16:37:01 and i'll ping the team next week for the stable review day :) 16:37:07 awesome 16:37:09 that's all from me 16:37:13 thank you 16:37:21 ++ 16:37:43 #topic Open discussion 16:37:47 nothing on the agenda 16:38:17 does anybody has anything to talk about? 16:38:55 this patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/857339 16:39:30 I was trying to replace hasattr with obj_attr_is_set as per comments but few existing test cases are failing 16:39:49 because instance.new_flavor is getting set as None 16:40:28 I have added a detailed comments in patch 16:41:38 sean-k-mooney, suggested earlier need to change in test cases, but I am not sure what 16:41:43 you need to do if instance.new_flavor and instance.new_flavor.obj_attr_is_set 16:41:54 so basically check if instance.new_falvor is not None 16:42:02 before callin obj_attr_is_set on it 16:42:19 >>> hasattr(None, "foo") 16:42:19 False 16:42:24 hashattr handles None internally 16:42:25 but then we won't be running these TC's, is it okay 16:42:57 I only checked this from hashattr vs obj_attr_is_set perspective 16:44:35 with hasattr you also skipped these test if new_flavor was None 16:44:49 yes 16:45:25 based on the review many people has more context on this change than me so I will defer to them 16:45:55 but they seems not to be present right now. So I suggest to ping them 16:46:05 actually later I understood that, when I removed the hasattr I was skipping these test 16:46:29 sean-k-mooney, :) 16:48:13 OK. Anything else before we close the meeting? 16:48:43 no, nothing from side thanks gibi 16:49:12 #endmeeting 16:49:40 bauzas: we need you to end the meeting 16:49:47 the bot refuse to listen to me 16:49:59 gibi: shit, forgot you to add as a chair 16:50:45 also, about the stable branch review day, yeah let's punt that to next week 16:50:53 ack 16:50:54 anyway, thanks a lot gibi 16:50:59 thanks all 16:51:00 bauzas: no worries 16:51:03 #endmeeting