| *** ministry is now known as __ministry | 08:11 | |
| opendevreview | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Remove no longer used RPs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/899625 | 11:22 |
|---|---|---|
| sahid | bauzas, dansmith o/ | 11:31 |
| sahid | how do you feel about making progress on that one? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/896512 | 11:31 |
| opendevreview | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Remove no longer used RPs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/899625 | 13:53 |
| *** han-guangyu_ is now known as han-guagnyu | 13:58 | |
| *** han-guagnyu is now known as han-guangyu | 13:59 | |
| bauzas | okay, this time I guess this reminder is needed : nova meeting in 1 hour here | 15:00 |
| bauzas | european folks, you now know | 15:00 |
| elodilles | ohh, thanks, i completely forgot about the meeting will start one hour earlier... :S damn phones & stuffs that adjust their time automatically /o\ | 15:14 |
| elodilles | (* 1 hr earlier for european folks who just moved to winter time) | 15:16 |
| clarkb | elodilles: if you use iceland time (on android at least) this is basically UTC since they don't do DST | 15:21 |
| elodilles | clarkb: ah, good to know :) | 15:28 |
| bauzas | #startmeeting nova | 16:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Tue Oct 31 16:00:26 2023 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is bauzas. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 16:00 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 16:00 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'nova' | 16:00 |
| bauzas | hey folks | 16:00 |
| bauzas | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova#Agenda_for_next_meeting | 16:00 |
| bauzas | who's around ? | 16:00 |
| bauzas | do we have quorum ? | 16:00 |
| bauzas | nothing urgent to say this week given we had the PTG last week | 16:00 |
| elodilles | o/ | 16:01 |
| Uggla | o/ | 16:01 |
| elodilles | everyone is travelling back from PTG i guess :D | 16:01 |
| bauzas | yeah | 16:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | o/ | 16:02 |
| bauzas | some rh folks also have some meetings | 16:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | those have finished already fyi | 16:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | well ignorign the one that overruning | 16:02 |
| bauzas | okay we can wait a bit | 16:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | we proably can get started | 16:03 |
| bauzas | well, okay | 16:03 |
| * bauzas was working on a customer bug meanwhile :) | 16:03 | |
| bauzas | #topic Bugs (stuck/critical) | 16:03 |
| bauzas | #info No Critical bug | 16:03 |
| bauzas | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=New 36 new untriaged bugs (-11 since the last meeting) | 16:03 |
| bauzas | kudos to melwitt and gibi for triaging ! | 16:03 |
| bauzas | #info Add yourself in the team bug roster if you want to help https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-bug-triage-roster | 16:04 |
| bauzas | Uggla: would you be happy with taking the baton this week ? | 16:04 |
| Uggla | bauzas, yep it's ok. | 16:04 |
| bauzas | cool thanks | 16:05 |
| bauzas | #info bug baton is Uggla | 16:05 |
| bauzas | #topic Gate status | 16:05 |
| bauzas | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=gate-failure Nova gate bugs | 16:05 |
| gmann | o/ | 16:05 |
| bauzas | #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?project=openstack%2Fnova&project=openstack%2Fplacement&pipeline=periodic-weekly Nova&Placement periodic jobs status | 16:05 |
| bauzas | all greens | 16:05 |
| elodilles | \o/ | 16:05 |
| bauzas | #info Please look at the gate failures and file a bug report with the gate-failure tag. | 16:05 |
| bauzas | I think I've seen some gate failures on my rpc series | 16:06 |
| bauzas | but I need to verify which jobs were having problems | 16:06 |
| bauzas | I hadn't time yet to recheck | 16:06 |
| bauzas | moving on ? | 16:07 |
| bauzas | #topic Release Planning | 16:08 |
| bauzas | #link https://releases.openstack.org/caracal/schedule.html | 16:08 |
| bauzas | #info Caracal-1 milestone in 2 weeks | 16:08 |
| bauzas | we agreed last week on the fact today should be a spec review day but unfortunately I hadn't provided an email | 16:09 |
| bauzas | so if you want, next week will be the first spec review day | 16:09 |
| bauzas | fine ? | 16:09 |
| bauzas | next tuesday* | 16:09 |
| sean-k-mooney | the spec review day was not ment to be today | 16:09 |
| bauzas | well, I will be on bank holiday tomorrow (+ Uggla + kashyap IIRC) and on Friday I'll be on PTO | 16:10 |
| kashyap | *Yep) | 16:10 |
| bauzas | https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-caracal-ptg#L175 said R-22 would be our spec review day | 16:10 |
| sean-k-mooney | bauzas: i gues syou did say r-22 | 16:12 |
| sean-k-mooney | i feel like that was a mistak | 16:12 |
| sean-k-mooney | i tought i suggested m1 for that bvut no worries | 16:12 |
| bauzas | no, I remember we said 'the week after PTG' | 16:12 |
| sean-k-mooney | we can do it next week | 16:12 |
| bauzas | m-1 was for reviewing implementations | 16:13 |
| sean-k-mooney | oh we are doing the implemation review day on m1 | 16:13 |
| sean-k-mooney | yep | 16:13 |
| sean-k-mooney | so ya we missed the first sepc review day | 16:13 |
| bauzas | yeah, my fault | 16:13 |
| sean-k-mooney | honestly im still burnt out form ptg so next week woudl be better | 16:13 |
| bauzas | -ETOOMANYTHINGS | 16:13 |
| bauzas | okay, agreed | 16:13 |
| bauzas | #info Next Tuesday (Nov 7) we will have a spec review day | 16:14 |
| bauzas | #action bauzas to community on that review day | 16:14 |
| bauzas | #unfo | 16:14 |
| bauzas | #undo | 16:14 |
| opendevmeet | Removing item from minutes: #action bauzas to community on that review day | 16:14 |
| bauzas | #action bauzas to communicate on that review day | 16:14 |
| bauzas | I'll also communicate the implementation review day in 2 weeks from now | 16:15 |
| bauzas | moving on | 16:15 |
| bauzas | #topic Caracal vPTG planning | 16:15 |
| bauzas | #undo | 16:15 |
| opendevmeet | Removing item from minutes: #topic Caracal vPTG planning | 16:15 |
| bauzas | #topic Caracal vPTG wrapup | 16:15 |
| bauzas | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-caracal-ptg PTG etherpad | 16:15 |
| bauzas | I have some draft in my emailbox that I need to eventually write | 16:16 |
| bauzas | I just don't know when yet | 16:16 |
| bauzas | for the moment, please look at the etherpad | 16:16 |
| elodilles | ++ | 16:16 |
| bauzas | we had one single topic we were unable to talk | 16:17 |
| sean-k-mooney | bauzas: wehn you send the eamil | 16:17 |
| sean-k-mooney | please use the readonly link for the etherpad | 16:17 |
| bauzas | like every cycle I do ? sure | 16:17 |
| bauzas | I already did | 16:17 |
| sean-k-mooney | ack not everyone does | 16:17 |
| bauzas | + I downloaded a text file | 16:17 |
| gmann | ++ | 16:18 |
| bauzas | and I tagged the latest rev | 16:18 |
| bauzas | sean-k-mooney: look at summary emails I write for a long time now | 16:18 |
| bauzas | you'll see what I provide | 16:18 |
| bauzas | anyway | 16:19 |
| bauzas | #topic Review priorities | 16:19 |
| bauzas | we agreed on something last week, so I'll punt this topic for this week | 16:19 |
| bauzas | #topic Stable Branches | 16:19 |
| bauzas | elodilles: please | 16:19 |
| elodilles | o7 | 16:19 |
| elodilles | stable/2023.2 branch was broken due to openstacksdk-functional-devstack job, but it is fixed -- https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/899154 | 16:19 |
| elodilles | thanks gmann for pinging me about this ^^^ | 16:20 |
| elodilles | other stable gates state should be also OK | 16:20 |
| elodilles | (or at least i'm not aware of any issue) | 16:20 |
| bauzas | cool | 16:20 |
| elodilles | stable release patches proposed: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/releases+is:open+intopic:nova | 16:20 |
| elodilles | so release liaisons please review ^^^ | 16:21 |
| bauzas | yeah I need to review them | 16:21 |
| elodilles | we might not need all of them | 16:21 |
| bauzas | that said, I have some bugfix I'd like to backport :) | 16:21 |
| bauzas | but let's not wait for it :) | 16:21 |
| bauzas | or | 16:21 |
| bauzas | as you want | 16:21 |
| gmann | also, these hyperV and vmware driver deprecation backport to stable/2023.1 are ready for 2nd review https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:deprecate-virt-drivers+status:open | 16:21 |
| elodilles | if you want to wait for any bugfix, then just -1 it | 16:21 |
| gmann | thanks bauzas for reviews. | 16:21 |
| bauzas | actually I have two series I want to backport | 16:21 |
| gmann | maybe it will be good to include those in releases elodilles mentioned | 16:21 |
| bauzas | the compute rpc fix and the sriov gpu fix | 16:22 |
| bauzas | elodilles: could we then wait a little bit before releasing ? | 16:22 |
| elodilles | bauzas: for sure | 16:22 |
| bauzas | elodilles: if you don't mind, I'll -1 the release patches | 16:22 |
| dansmith | the compute rpc one for sure! | 16:22 |
| bauzas | I need to create the backports | 16:23 |
| dansmith | sorry someone was at the door when we talked about gate stability, | 16:23 |
| dansmith | but I've had to recheck those a few times now, all for different reasons :( | 16:23 |
| bauzas | np | 16:23 |
| dansmith | feels like we're slipping here | 16:23 |
| bauzas | I've seen multi-cell | 16:23 |
| bauzas | but I haven't yet looked at *what* failed for this job | 16:23 |
| dansmith | each one I've looked at has been a different thing | 16:24 |
| bauzas | lovely | 16:24 |
| bauzas | something due to some stuff with 'v' name that ends by 'olume' ? | 16:25 |
| dansmith | some, but not all | 16:25 |
| bauzas | if that's something starting with 'n' and ending by 'etwork' I can understand | 16:25 |
| bauzas | anyway, I need to do homework, I just don't know yet when | 16:26 |
| bauzas | okay, I guess we're done with stable | 16:27 |
| elodilles | ah, maybe the general info: | 16:28 |
| bauzas | nothing we need to discuss for now, we just need to look | 16:28 |
| elodilles | #info stable branch status / gate failures tracking etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-branch-ci | 16:28 |
| bauzas | ah yeah | 16:28 |
| elodilles | and that's all :) | 16:28 |
| bauzas | #topic Open discussion | 16:28 |
| bauzas | gmann: wants to talk the topic you had ? | 16:28 |
| bauzas | (gmann) RBAC: service role usage for Nova to talk to other services | 16:29 |
| gmann | oh, which one? | 16:29 |
| gmann | k | 16:29 |
| bauzas | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-caracal-ptg#L871 | 16:29 |
| gmann | there are some notes there on the thing I wanted to discuss. we discussed it long back on how to proceed on service role | 16:30 |
| gmann | which was 1. make policy default to service role only 2. accept service token in API 3. use nova generated admin context whereever it is required (for example getting servers in server external event API) | 16:30 |
| gmann | but when I was doing it for swap volume API (which is lot o call from cinder to nova and nova to cinder), it end up that we need to use admin context for almost all the operations in this API. so it looks like we are going to make policy default to service role only and use service token to just check it is called from service not form user | 16:32 |
| gmann | BUT use admin context for all actual operations | 16:32 |
| gmann | this is something we discussed on Monday PTG but left nova specific discussion for later | 16:33 |
| gmann | sean-k-mooney: has idea of passing user as well service token in service-only-APIs whihc is also listed in etherpad | 16:33 |
| sean-k-mooney | right so when swap volume is called by cinder on behalf of user sean | 16:34 |
| gmann | sean-k-mooney: if I understand your idea correct you want to do it same way we do currently right? passing service token as header in user token - https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/b37d50fecc92c17c3b30e41f6ad8869e1f9bd2ef/nova/service_auth.py#L33 | 16:34 |
| sean-k-mooney | we shoudl be recordign that as coming form sean not cinder | 16:35 |
| sean-k-mooney | gmann: yes it would be the presence fo a service token(with service role) in the header and any other token that would make it a service request | 16:35 |
| bauzas | I'm a bit confused here | 16:36 |
| bauzas | probably because I'm not an expert | 16:36 |
| gmann | and that service token can be used to know if request is from service or not. if not then 403. | 16:36 |
| sean-k-mooney | the user token is so we knwo on behlaf of which (user/project) the request was made | 16:36 |
| dansmith | authorized by the service token but limited in scope (and recorded in audit) as the user | 16:36 |
| bauzas | but I thought we were already providing both tokens ? | 16:36 |
| sean-k-mooney | dansmith: exactly | 16:36 |
| gmann | bauzas: we do but we do not check service token is must provided or not | 16:37 |
| sean-k-mooney | bauzas: we are but some of these api are admin only today | 16:37 |
| bauzas | okay, so that's a question server-side ? | 16:37 |
| gmann | dansmith: sean-k-mooney so if no service token presence in those servcei-ony API then 403 right? | 16:37 |
| sean-k-mooney | so the user token in that case is an admin token created form the config for the cinder user | 16:37 |
| sean-k-mooney | gmann: yes | 16:37 |
| gmann | cool. | 16:37 |
| sean-k-mooney | 403 if service token is not passed | 16:37 |
| sean-k-mooney | when callling swap volume or external events api for example | 16:38 |
| gmann | yeah, we do not check that currently so it will achieve the same thing we wanted via policy default | 16:38 |
| sean-k-mooney | for compatiblity we are currently supproting "service or admin" right | 16:38 |
| gmann | it is admin only no service but that is going to be "service or admin" | 16:39 |
| sean-k-mooney | meaning we woudl allow it if the user token was an admin token or if there was an addtional service token | 16:39 |
| gmann | I mean "<whatever default currently admin or member + service role>" | 16:39 |
| sean-k-mooney | so on the devstack side oen thing we shoudl do eventually is have a way to make sure the service_user does nto have admin in its role assignemtns | 16:40 |
| gmann | I am thinking 1. fetch the service token form header 2. use that as target in oslo policy so that if no service role then it fail | 16:40 |
| sean-k-mooney | for the service_only policy rihgt | 16:41 |
| gmann | yes | 16:41 |
| sean-k-mooney | for the service_or_admin we would need to fall back | 16:41 |
| gmann | and policy default will be "admin or service" | 16:41 |
| sean-k-mooney | right so that woudl check the service token if present or user token if not in that case | 16:41 |
| gmann | or we can use "role:service" only in policy default also if we are going to use service token only for policy enforcement | 16:42 |
| sean-k-mooney | is that somethign we can do today? | 16:42 |
| gmann | tricky part is if anyone want to override the policy to non-service role also then it will be little complicated to allow those | 16:42 |
| dansmith | yeah it kinda needs policy to check the service token, but the rest of cinder should use user token for scoping and audit logging | 16:42 |
| gmann | maybe we need to pass both user and service token in oslo.policy | 16:43 |
| gmann | dansmith: yeah | 16:43 |
| sean-k-mooney | gmann: i think ^ is likely needed yes | 16:43 |
| sean-k-mooney | both tokens and likely an extention to policy.json | 16:43 |
| dansmith | gmann: can we have a way to say "apply this rule to service token"? then that can be the default and you could reset it to user if you prefer | 16:43 |
| gmann | we need to make sure overriden policy keep working and it is configurable | 16:43 |
| sean-k-mooney | so that we can express the requireemnt for for roles on each one | 16:43 |
| sean-k-mooney | dansmith: ya i think wee need to be able to say somethign like "service_token_required_role=service or default_token_required_role=admin" | 16:44 |
| gmann | dansmith: need to check if such fallback there in oslo.policy otherwise we can combine the both token in the targets to oslo.policy | 16:44 |
| gmann | if we keep rule as 'role:service' only and passing both token (service and user) as targets to oslo.policy then it will work for our default (service only) as well as for any overridden rule too | 16:46 |
| sean-k-mooney | gmann: that would allow a user that was given the service role to make a request with a single token | 16:47 |
| sean-k-mooney | im not sure we want to allow that | 16:47 |
| gmann | if we will use rule default as 'admin or service' then it will be comlicated to disallow only admin to pass the checks | 16:47 |
| sean-k-mooney | i wanted to disallow the user_token to pass if it had the service role without also having a service token | 16:47 |
| gmann | sean-k-mooney: but admin-or-service also allow such user having service role | 16:47 |
| sean-k-mooney | perhaps that shoudl be allowed but im not convinece it shoudl | 16:47 |
| sean-k-mooney | gmann: it woudl allow it because of the admin role | 16:48 |
| sean-k-mooney | not because of the service role | 16:48 |
| dansmith | well, I was thinking more like "this rule applies to the user token" or "this rule applies to the service token" and default to user, which is current behavior | 16:48 |
| gmann | dansmith: ohk. and change default behavior to check rule for service token right? | 16:49 |
| dansmith | so if you set the swap_volume rule to service token, then it will use the service token to decide if a request can or cannot run that operation instead of the user token (and require it be present of course) | 16:49 |
| gmann | so service token check first if it pass then go for user token check otherwise fail early aonly | 16:49 |
| dansmith | gmann: change default just for swap_volume you mean right? | 16:49 |
| sean-k-mooney | swap_volume and i think external events are the two api this would apply too for now | 16:49 |
| dansmith | and detach | 16:49 |
| gmann | dansmith: I mean first we check service token rule and then user token rule | 16:50 |
| dansmith | gmann: no, not what I was thinking | 16:50 |
| gmann | humm | 16:50 |
| sean-k-mooney | dansmith: well volume detach instnace action will not need this change | 16:50 |
| dansmith | for swap_volume, we only care about the service_token for *authorization* so policy only needs to check that | 16:50 |
| dansmith | cinder still uses the user_token for querying the DB and logging, but the ability to do the operation is authorized by service token | 16:51 |
| dansmith | create_volume would still be authorized by user token only | 16:51 |
| gmann | and default policy will be "role:service" right? | 16:51 |
| sean-k-mooney | "roleLservice token:service" | 16:51 |
| dansmith | sean-k-mooney: well, detach is currently checking the service token explicitly right? so if we extend the syntax to allow saying "this operation is authorized by the service token" we'd want that rule to work the same way Itink | 16:51 |
| dansmith | okay I think we're getting confused here | 16:52 |
| sean-k-mooney | where "role:service" woudl imply "role:service token:user" or current behavior | 16:52 |
| dansmith | perhaps we should take this outside the nova meeting | 16:52 |
| * bauzas is already confused fwiw | 16:52 | |
| sean-k-mooney | dansmith: detach on the cinder api is | 16:52 |
| bauzas | yeah, I think we need some gmeet | 16:52 |
| gmann | yeah, maybe let's have a call | 16:52 |
| bauzas | I can organize it, but I won't be able to attend it I guess | 16:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | dansmith: ya so i think you and i are on the same page | 16:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | we need a syntax in the role to say this is authorised by the service token | 16:53 |
| gmann | let me scheudle one after TC meeting today (which is after 3 hr from now). sean-k-mooney is that late for you? | 16:53 |
| dansmith | yeah | 16:53 |
| dansmith | gmann: can we make it a different day// | 16:54 |
| gmann | sure | 16:54 |
| dansmith | today is already busy and full of meetings for me | 16:54 |
| dansmith | I'm about meetinged out | 16:54 |
| gmann | tomorrow same time as nova meeting today? | 16:54 |
| bauzas | I'm off this wed and this friday, but please do this when I'm not here :) | 16:54 |
| dansmith | gmann: +1h from this meeting I think | 16:54 |
| dansmith | gmann: we have a downstream meeting this time tomorrow | 16:54 |
| gmann | sean-k-mooney: yeah, i got point for service_token vs service role. but need to check syntext and how oslo.policy going to enforce it | 16:55 |
| dansmith | or 1h before this one would work | 16:55 |
| * bauzas will stamp whatever needs to be stamped but I feel ignorant here | 16:55 | |
| gmann | +1 hr is good for me. sean-k-mooney how about you ? tomorrow 17 UTC | 16:55 |
| dansmith | bauzas: you mean you're delegating and we'll brief you when we get a solution :) | 16:55 |
| bauzas | dansmith: exactly, sold | 16:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | ill ateend whenever | 16:55 |
| gmann | cool. i will send invite | 16:56 |
| sean-k-mooney | i think dansmith more or less is on the same page as me so if there there its likely fine and ill attend if im around | 16:56 |
| bauzas | I just pass my PTL service token to dansmith and sean-k-mooney and tell to use my auth token for signing-off | 16:56 |
| sean-k-mooney | i shoudl be free at that time for what tis worth | 16:56 |
| dansmith | bauzas: badum tish | 16:56 |
| bauzas | love it when a plan comes together ! | 16:58 |
| * bauzas goes burning a cigar | 16:58 | |
| bauzas | and ends the meeting | 16:58 |
| bauzas | thanks all | 16:59 |
| bauzas | #endmeeting | 16:59 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Oct 31 16:59:11 2023 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 16:59 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-10-31-16.00.html | 16:59 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-10-31-16.00.txt | 16:59 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-10-31-16.00.log.html | 16:59 |
| elodilles | thanks o/ | 16:59 |
| opendevreview | John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: WIP: Add spec for PCI Groups https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/899719 | 17:00 |
| sean-k-mooney | :) i should add ^ to my reading list | 17:02 |
| bauzas | sean-k-mooney: dansmith: when you're around, fwiw, I wrote a bugfix for the sriov gpu problem https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/899625 | 17:03 |
| bauzas | we basically agreed on the solution but I needed to add another meat | 17:04 |
| bauzas | since we create a new mediated device when spawning, there is some race condition until the periodic update_rp() runs | 17:04 |
| bauzas | so I tried to find a solution, which is to call the update_rp() method after the contextmanager run | 17:06 |
| dansmith | bauzas: okay I need to catch up on context | 17:12 |
| bauzas | as a reminder, a GPU has multiple VFs | 17:13 |
| bauzas | each of the VFs can have only one mdev | 17:13 |
| bauzas | but, | 17:13 |
| bauzas | this depends on the vgpu type | 17:13 |
| bauzas | say a vgpu type only supports 2 vGPUs, then if a GPU has 16 VFs, only two of them can have a mdev | 17:14 |
| bauzas | for the first mdev, this doesn't change the sysfs : we see that one VF has available_instances be 0 while the 15 else have available_instances = 1 | 17:15 |
| dansmith | I think this was discussed in the nova room after I had to leave for tc stuff right? | 17:15 |
| bauzas | but once we use another VF for creating a mdev, then all of the 14 else now have available_instances = 0 | 17:15 |
| bauzas | dansmith: well, we discussed this before I think but I haven't verified whether you were around | 17:16 |
| bauzas | https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-caracal-ptg#L678 | 17:16 |
| dansmith | yeah I wasn't, AFAIK | 17:17 |
| bauzas | so, the problem was due to https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/9c9cd3d9b6d1d1e6f62012cd8a86fd588fb74dc2/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L9110-L9111 | 17:17 |
| dansmith | I'm in another convo right now leading up to the TC meeting soon, but I'll circle back | 17:17 |
| bauzas | basically, the libvirt driver correctly numbers the values and then it passes a total=0 | 17:18 |
| bauzas | so we need now to delete the RP if so | 17:18 |
| bauzas | dansmith: sure, no worries, I understand this needs a lot of context | 17:18 |
| bauzas | and probably some hardware environment :) | 17:19 |
| *** elodilles is now known as elodilles_pto | 20:29 | |
| opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: add pyproject.toml to support pip 23.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/899753 | 21:25 |
| -opendevstatus- NOTICE: Gerrit on review.opendev.org will be restarted to pick up a configuration change required as part of Gerrit 3.8 upgrade preparations. | 22:02 | |
| JayF | sean-k-mooney: gave you co-authored-by on an ironic change that looks like 899753; your toml file LGTM and the commit message was way better than what I would've written so I cribbed it all :D | 22:45 |
| JayF | thank you :D | 22:45 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!