16:00:20 <gthiemonge> #startmeeting Octavia 16:00:20 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Wed Dec 4 16:00:20 2024 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gthiemonge. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:20 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:20 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'octavia' 16:00:24 <gthiemonge> o/ 16:00:28 <tweining> o/ 16:00:35 <johnsom> o/ 16:01:52 <gthiemonge> #topic Announcements 16:02:34 <gthiemonge> well, no announcements from me this week, I was on PTO :D anything to mention here? 16:02:51 <tweining> mmh, I can't think of anything 16:03:32 <johnsom> I don't think I have anything. Just a reminder that Library freeze is coming up the week of Feb 17th 16:04:29 <tweining> working on the rate limiting rfe might become my personal christmas project ;) 16:04:43 <gthiemonge> lol 16:05:16 <gthiemonge> happy holidays ;-) 16:05:34 <gthiemonge> #topic CI Status 16:05:47 <johnsom> Yeah, getting OVN to behave so I can work on my SR-IOV patches might become mine. 16:05:57 <gthiemonge> I think we're still stuck in octavia-tempest-plugin because of multiple failures 16:06:22 <gthiemonge> hacking, doc, unmaintained branch removal, etc.. 16:06:32 <gthiemonge> we may have to squash a patchchain to move forward 16:06:46 <gthiemonge> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia-tempest-plugin/+/934270 16:07:05 <tweining> or we could temporarily disable pep8 just to integrate that chain? 16:07:44 <gthiemonge> i don't know which template enables pep8 16:08:33 <johnsom> It's one of the "base" jobs provided 16:08:34 <gthiemonge> could be a solution, like what we're doing here with the doc job: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia-tempest-plugin/+/934270/4/zuul.d/projects.yaml 16:09:46 <gthiemonge> https://opendev.org/openstack/openstack-zuul-jobs/src/branch/master/zuul.d/project-templates.yaml#L3489-L3501 16:10:26 <gthiemonge> it's the only job in tempest-plugin-jobs, IMHO it's safe to disable it temporarily 16:11:08 <gthiemonge> any objections? 16:11:27 <johnsom> Nope 16:11:59 <gthiemonge> ok, we have a plan! 16:12:27 <gthiemonge> I will update the patch 16:12:40 <gthiemonge> anything else to report about CI? 16:12:57 <johnsom> Thanks for handling that 16:13:37 <tweining> +1 16:14:04 <tweining> nothing else I think 16:14:11 <tweining> oh wait 16:15:07 <tweining> do the failure we discussed also include the openstack-tox-pip-check-reqs job failure? 16:15:21 <gthiemonge> where's that? 16:15:48 <johnsom> It's not clear if one of the unpin patches will fix that or not. It might just be broken 16:16:06 <tweining> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/936811?tab=change-view-tab-header-zuul-results-summary for instance 16:16:12 <gthiemonge> not related 16:16:42 <tweining> honestly, I did not understand that failure 16:16:51 <gthiemonge> yeah I haven't seen this failure 16:17:14 <gthiemonge> so no idea 16:17:49 <johnsom> It's falsely reporting that some requirements in requirements.txt are not used even though they are. It was triggered by the change to Noble from Jammy 16:18:44 <johnsom> IMO it's a nice to have check, but I'm not going to lose sleep if we disable it for now 16:18:48 <tweining> from my perspective it fails, but does not print any error 16:19:19 <johnsom> It's in the log: 16:19:23 <johnsom> https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/AYjdCtJu/ 16:20:04 <johnsom> It is flagging most if not all as unused requirements 16:20:09 <tweining> that does not look like an error to me. I agree that it is probably not crucial to have 16:20:45 <gthiemonge> we can create a launchpad and disable it temporarily 16:20:49 <johnsom> It just catches the case where we remove a dependency from the code and forget to remove it from requirement.txt 16:22:54 <johnsom> I can take this one 16:23:07 <gthiemonge> thanks johnsom 16:23:17 <gthiemonge> #topic Brief progress reports / bugs needing review 16:24:05 <tweining> not much progress, but I worked a little bit on the rate limiting rfe 16:24:54 <tweining> the api-ref part to be precise 16:25:15 <johnsom> I had some holiday time off, but right now I am working on setting up a multinode devstack on bare metal to continue the SR-IOV for members work. 16:25:53 * johnsom notes, pypi is down... sigh 16:27:59 <gthiemonge> nothing new on my side 16:28:05 <gthiemonge> #topic Open Discussion 16:28:10 <gthiemonge> anything else guys? 16:28:37 <johnsom> Nope 16:30:09 <gthiemonge> ack 16:30:19 <gthiemonge> we can close the meeting 16:30:24 <gthiemonge> thank you guys! 16:30:24 <tweining> maybe https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bug/2090782%22 ? 16:31:44 <tweining> yeah, I noticed it has actually not directly to do with octavia 16:31:58 <gthiemonge> I'm not convinced it should be added to octavia-lib 16:32:07 <johnsom> As we discussed at the PTG I think this is a temp fix. Really we need to go through and make the models flat or limited where it makes sense. Then remove all of this recursive model loading stuff. We have had to hack it so many times.... 16:32:27 <gthiemonge> we agreed to use limited_graph as a backportable solution until we find a better way to deal with objects 16:32:38 <tweining> right 16:33:02 <johnsom> Yeah, interestingly enough, I was 90% the driver lib/agent was already flat 16:34:28 <gthiemonge> I'm wondering if there's a need for recursive objects there 16:34:59 <gthiemonge> if all the gets are limited_graph=True, maybe we can do that directly in the agent 16:35:07 <johnsom> We explicitly did not have recursive objects in the driver agent 16:35:10 <johnsom> Yeah, right 16:35:53 <gthiemonge> ok, I'll take a closer look at it 16:35:58 <johnsom> It should probably go here if anywhere: https://github.com/openstack/octavia/blob/master/octavia/api/drivers/driver_agent/driver_get.py 16:36:50 <gthiemonge> hmm yeah 16:36:54 <johnsom> Ah, I see recurse there, so I think someone requested that change, probably for OVN 16:37:49 <gthiemonge> they are updating it there: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/936857/1/octavia/api/drivers/driver_agent/driver_get.py 16:38:01 <gthiemonge> still recurse=True but limited_graph is optional 16:40:31 <gthiemonge> I will check with the ovn-provider folks too 16:40:35 <gthiemonge> anything else? 16:42:20 <gthiemonge> I guess that's all for this week 16:42:24 <gthiemonge> thank you! 16:42:29 <gthiemonge> #endmeeting