16:00:38 #startmeeting ironic_bfv 16:00:39 Meeting started Thu Jul 20 16:00:38 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is TheJulia. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:40 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:42 The meeting name has been set to 'ironic_bfv' 16:00:45 Who is here for a boot from volume meeting? 16:01:13 o/ 16:01:24 o/ 16:01:25 o? 16:01:59 Greetings everyone 16:02:09 Our agenda, as always is on the wiki. 16:02:11 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Ironic-BFV 16:02:25 #topic Announcements/Reminders 16:02:27 o/ 16:02:38 #info Next week is Pike-3 and the feature freeze for nova. 16:03:02 o/ 16:03:18 #info About an hour ago, we achieved a mostly successful tempest run, which only failed in cleaning up the node. More investigation required. 16:03:30 \o/ 16:03:34 that's awesome 16:03:49 TheJulia: thank you for the work 16:04:30 #link http://logs.openstack.org/49/485349/2/check/gate-tempest-dsvm-ironic-ipa-wholedisk-bios-agent_ipmitool-tinyipa-ubuntu-xenial/6a71f11/logs/ironic-bm-logs/node-0_console_2017-07-20-15:07:22.txt.gz 16:04:53 Anyone have any other updates before we move into current status? 16:05:25 nothing from me 16:05:44 i have nothing 16:05:53 Okay, moving on then 16:05:58 #topic Current Status 16:06:25 My apologies, I've not kept up with the ether pad this week, but I can enumerate our current status and where we need to focus on at the moment. 16:06:49 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Ironic-BFV 16:07:30 TheJulia: I wonder if it's going to be enough for Nova folks that most of the test has passed 16:07:54 #info Requested refactoring of the nova change has raised some issues. The code works, as seen in announcements, but the tests need to be updated. I've kind of noted it in that revision 16:08:48 TheJulia: i will update the tests 16:08:52 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/215385/ 16:09:49 hshiina: it will likely be worth pinging mriedem as we have a structural conundrum there. 16:10:48 I can also try and start that discussion with him today 16:11:06 TheJulia: thanks 16:11:22 Additionally, another patch was proposed https://review.openstack.org/#/c/485550/ which I suspect they are not going to be willing to take, but I can ask. 16:12:15 dtantsur: I'll update my notes on the nova rev and ping mriedem with the partial success 16:12:24 cool 16:12:37 yeah, I believe the result we have is good enough to proceed, but I may be wrong 16:12:39 The other thing that we need to work out is why the clean-up went sideways in the ironic conductor on the job that booted. 16:12:50 dtantsur: ditto, as long as we get the tests fixed. 16:12:56 s/fixed/sorted/ 16:13:04 since there is a conundrum there as well. 16:13:55 Other than that, I think the patches inside ironic are looking fairly good, minor fixes likely need to be addressed, but devstack/tempest are under review, and hopefully we can figure out the ironic problem fairly quickly and go from there. 16:14:10 I think we just figured out the plan for the next few days too :) 16:14:16 Any questions/comments/concerns? 16:14:40 Do nova changes need more eyes on them? or do we just getting nova cores to look 16:14:57 (I guess more eyes never hurts) 16:15:59 mjturek: more eyes would likely help, but we're fairly close to landing, just the requirement they placed upon us was a passing test run in CI, since the experimental gate change was pending :) 16:16:25 IIRC we have 2 patches, right? 16:16:31 what's up with the second one? 16:16:33 cool cool, I'll try to help with the cleaning debugging as well 16:16:38 is it critical to merge it as well? 16:16:53 As I understand it, it is not critical to merge this cycle 16:17:12 hshiina: please correct me if I'm wrong 16:17:36 I don't think it's critical 16:17:57 okay, so we mostly need to drag nova folks into reviewing and merging the first 16:18:14 dtantsur: yup, once we fix the unit tests 16:19:05 Turns out we can't mock a blockdevicevolumemapping object, you can only mock a blockdevicemapping with the tools, and you get back a list. so the code that works, fails testing because of object issues as one wraps the other 16:19:23 It is all spelled out in revision 24 thorough the current revision of the first nova patch. 16:20:19 of course, they may look at it and backpedal on how we got there which was to not hit the database again 16:21:19 Does anyone have anything to add to current status, or have I overwhelmed everyone with information? 16:22:42 * TheJulia hears crickets 16:22:44 thanks for the update! 16:22:48 lol, I'm good :) 16:22:50 o/ 16:22:58 \o jlvillal 16:23:26 Well, then, I guess it is Open Discussion time. 16:23:31 #topic Open Discussion 16:23:38 Do we have anything else to discuss this week? 16:23:51 I forgot to add something to the agenda but I was hoping to discuss a comment from hshiina on one of my patches 16:24:12 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472856/8 16:24:29 "Isn't it necessary to remove the similar validation in storage interface" 16:24:37 wondering if there's any reason not to 16:25:23 I'm thinking it should be kept 16:25:36 just in case the code gets called independently? 16:25:59 yeah 16:26:08 okay fair enough 16:26:10 say someone mucks with their configs, restarts the conductor, and calls node-validate 16:27:00 oh - that's a good point 16:27:52 well even then, wouldn't both the pxe interface and storage interface get validated? 16:28:20 pxe should as well, but the contract is the storage interface work for cinder had to use ipxe 16:28:27 (I mean, validate get called on both those interfaces) 16:28:27 or it had to be enabled 16:28:31 but 16:28:49 at the same time, it is a different thing, if one has all virtual media drivers, then they don't need ipxe booting 16:28:58 dtantsur: thoughts? 16:29:12 * dtantsur looks 16:30:16 interesting indeed, I wonder if it should somehow be a part of the boot interface.. 16:32:09 dtantsur: so the change does make the validation part of the pxe boot interface, but I don't remove similar validation from the storage interface 16:32:21 ah, ok 16:32:41 yeah, I guess the storage interface cannot know if it's compatible with the boot interface 16:33:52 I sense possibly a little more pondering? 16:34:12 yeaaah - I'm cool with having the discussion in the review! 16:34:23 Maybe put a TODO note to reconsider the check in the storage interface or remove it if necessary because of PXE boot? 16:34:41 +1 16:34:45 sounds good to me 16:35:13 I imagine someone at some point is going to ask for it to be removed, or the logic adjusted, and we can easily re-evaluate then. 16:35:34 And if we have a note, then the history is documented, and it can be a easy decision. 16:36:02 i'm fine with the idea 16:36:14 very cool thanks TheJulia dtantsur hshiina :) 16:37:31 Okay, well if there is nothing else. I've already updated the nova revision with the latest comments, and mjturek we can begin digging through the logs to try and figure out what happened with the cleaning step. 16:37:42 cool! 16:38:42 Okay, see everyone in #openstack-ironic 16:38:46 Thanks everyone! 16:38:54 thanks 16:38:57 #endmeeting