| opendevreview | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/cinder master: Imported Translations from Zanata https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/818037 | 02:36 |
|---|---|---|
| *** abhishekk is now known as akekane|home | 05:12 | |
| *** akekane|home is now known as abhishekk | 05:12 | |
| *** Guest5958 is now known as geguileo | 09:09 | |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/cinder master: Fix: Race between attachment and volume deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/801913 | 09:50 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/cinder master: [Pure Storage] Remove all REST version checks https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/817085 | 09:50 |
| opendevreview | Simon Dodsley proposed openstack/cinder master: [Pure Storage] Add volume metadata https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/818098 | 14:57 |
| *** dviroel is now known as dviroel|lunch | 14:59 | |
| tosky | whoami-rajat: hi, would it make sense to detach https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder-tempest-plugin/+/790942/ from https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder-tempest-plugin/+/790899/, so that 790942 can be merged now? | 15:04 |
| opendevreview | Simon Dodsley proposed openstack/cinder master: [Pure Storage] Add volume metadata https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/818098 | 15:23 |
| simondodsley | stable cores: Can I get a final vote for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/815884 | 15:25 |
| simondodsley | stable cores: Also a final vote for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/817090 please | 15:29 |
| opendevreview | Helen Walsh proposed openstack/cinder master: PowerMax Driver - Re-use existing initiator group/host. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/787764 | 15:34 |
| *** dviroel is now known as dviroel_ | 15:37 | |
| opendevreview | Venkata krishna Thumu proposed openstack/cinder master: [SVF] Manage host attachment using portsets https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/817351 | 15:46 |
| *** dviroel|lunch is now known as dviroel | 16:18 | |
| whoami-rajat | tosky, so, it's possible but if you see I'm moving some methods from test snapshots file to generic scenario manager which I'm adding/modifying in my previous patch | 16:22 |
| whoami-rajat | also i would like to get that optimization merged with test_snapshots... | 16:22 |
| *** akekane_ is now known as abhishekk | 16:43 | |
| tosky | oh, oki | 16:54 |
| tosky | so theoretically speaking the order of the patches can be swapped, but then both would need to be changed | 16:55 |
| tosky | it wouldn't be just a rebase of the "use the tempest stable manager" patch on top of master | 16:56 |
| tosky | but the methods added by the other patch would need to be removed, and the move should happen in the other patch | 16:56 |
| whoami-rajat | tosky, yes, i agree the order shouldn't be there given the purpose of patches but i might not have that much time to rework this week, but if anyone's interested reviewing the test_snapshots patch i can walk through | 17:00 |
| tosky | whoami-rajat: sure, np | 17:11 |
| tosky | whoami-rajat: we can definitely work on the other patch | 17:11 |
| *** tosky is now known as Guest6054 | 18:05 | |
| *** tosky_ is now known as tosky | 18:05 | |
| opendevreview | Brian Rosmaita proposed openstack/os-brick master: Prevent CI from running on irrelevant files https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-brick/+/817111 | 18:31 |
| *** tosky_ is now known as tosky | 18:48 | |
| qwebirc70383 | Hi, is it true that Cinder cannot manage/import an ENCRYPTED volume from a storage unit? (We use a Dell unit) | 19:48 |
| qwebirc70383 | If this is true, where can I find this information? Thanks | 19:49 |
| qwebirc70383 | (I'm referring to volumes created outside of the OpenStack environment, or, a previous environment. I believe it is possible to manage/import an UNencrypted volume, but not an encrypted volume, as not possible to provide the encryption key used...??) | 19:50 |
| rosmaita | qwebirc70383: not sure where it's documented, but it is true ... there is no way to associate an encryption key with a volume on the backend | 19:51 |
| qwebirc70383 | Thanks rosmaita. It seems a big issue, at least for us. I guess other people are just using cinder/encryption in a different way | 19:52 |
| qwebirc70383 | Can I file a bug about this? | 19:52 |
| rosmaita | qwebirc70383: sure ... it would be helpful for you to include your use case, and what kind of encryption you have on the backend (it would have to be compatible with cinder's workflow) | 19:55 |
| rosmaita | qwebirc70383: also, just out of curiosity, how does your array size an encrypted volume? what I mean is, if a user asks for an encrypted volume of size 2 GiB, how much usable space do they get? 2 GiB, or 2 GiB minus the encryption container metadata? | 19:57 |
| qwebirc70383 | ah well we'd stick to Cinder encrypting it I guess, or just try to use the exact settings it uses to encrypted (key size, algorithm etc) --- but just good for provisioning if we can populate a volume before actual deployment | 19:58 |
| qwebirc70383 | and if needing to full redeploy... well, it makes it so we do not need to recreate the volumes+data | 19:59 |
| qwebirc70383 | As for the size issue, I haven't checked as that just hasn't been a concern of ours. But I see what you mean. Cinder creates a volume of the size we request, that gets encrypted with LUKS then the unlocked volume gets mounted to the vm/server. | 20:02 |
| qwebirc70383 | so there must be some overhead from the encryption | 20:02 |
| rosmaita | yes, enriquetaso has been working on this issue: https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/cinder-specs/specs/xena/sizing-encrypted-volumes.html | 20:03 |
| rosmaita | though i think she has been having second thoughts about the change proposed in that spec and is working on proposing something else | 20:04 |
| qwebirc70383 | That looks like the issue is 'just' converting unencrypted -> encrypted, right? Like this bug here https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1944577 | 20:06 |
| qwebirc70383 | But I think that's a separate issue to managing/importing an already encrypted volume (with 'correct' encryption) | 20:07 |
| rosmaita | qwebirc70383: you are right that they are separate issues, i'm just curious about how you do it with your array ... does the array do encryption, or does it just give you raw blocks, and the consumer has to handle the encryption | 20:08 |
| qwebirc70383 | Maybe this shows my ignorance, I thought it was straight-forward, we create an encrypted volume type and I assumed Cinder did the actual encryption, our Dell storage unit knows 0 about it (I thought) | 20:10 |
| opendevreview | Eric Harney proposed openstack/cinder master: mypy: annotate volume/api.py https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/733622 | 20:15 |
| rosmaita | qwebirc70383: you are correct, the dell unit doesn't know about cinder encryption, it just has data ... i'm asking about the unmanaged volume on the backend, how did that thing get encrypted? | 20:18 |
| enriquetaso | I'm looking for the note about 'Cinder cannot manage/import an ENCRYPTED volume from a storage unit' but can't find it | 20:18 |
| rosmaita | also, i just realized that this thing has never merged: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/768458 | 20:26 |
| *** dviroel is now known as dviroel|out | 20:30 | |
| enriquetaso | oops | 20:31 |
| qwebirc70383 | rosmaita: I understand now. Possibly via `cryptsetup`, but honestly, even just being able to import volume that was encrypted with Cinder in a prior deployment would be enough | 20:32 |
| rosmaita | qwebirc70383: ok, that doesn't seem unreasonable ... we just need to figure out a way to make the encryption key available | 20:34 |
| qwebirc70383 | Are most people on the team employed by OpenStack? Or by other companies that use OpenStack? Or just literally doing this in your free time? | 20:39 |
| rosmaita | qwebirc70383: mostly companies that use OpenStack (or make it easier for others to use openstack), and some people doing it in their spare time | 20:57 |
| qwebirc70383 | Interesting, thanks - just curious! | 21:00 |
| qwebirc70383 | I made a bug report, whether or not someone thinks it is too similar to something that exists already, we will see. I couldn't see anything with my exact, simple, use case. | 21:02 |
| qwebirc70383 | https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1951163 | 21:02 |
| opendevreview | Sofia Enriquez proposed openstack/cinder master: RBD: Fix _show_msg_check_clone_v2_api https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/777031 | 21:03 |
| opendevreview | Rodrigo Barbieri proposed openstack/cinder stable/wallaby: [DEBUG] Check lvs output https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/818140 | 21:03 |
| opendevreview | Sofia Enriquez proposed openstack/cinder master: RBD: Fix _show_msg_check_clone_v2_api https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/777031 | 21:47 |
| *** tosky is now known as Guest6070 | 22:42 | |
| *** tosky_ is now known as tosky | 22:42 | |
| *** tosky is now known as Guest6073 | 23:07 | |
| *** tosky_ is now known as tosky | 23:07 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!