On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> wrote: > On 03/18/2014 10:11 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 07:50:15AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > >> Hi Team, > >> > >> We have 2 choices > >> > >> 1) Upgrade to libvirt 0.9.8+ (See [1] for details) > >> 2) Enable UCA and upgrade to libvirt 1.2.2+ (see [2] for details) > >> > >> For #1, we received a patched deb from @SergeHallyn/@JamesPage and ran > >> tests on it in review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/79816/ > >> For #2, @SergeHallyn/@JamesPage have updated UCA > >> ("precise-proposed/icehouse") repo and we ran tests on it in review > >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/74889/ > >> > >> For IceHouse, my recommendation is to request Ubuntu folks to push the > >> patched 0.9.8+ version we validated to public repos, then we can can > >> install/run gate jobs with that version. This is probably the smallest > >> risk of the 2 choices. > > > > If we've re-run the tests in that review enough times to be confident > > we've had a chance of exercising the race conditions, then using the > > patched 0.9.8 seems like a no-brainer. We know the current version in > > ubuntu repos is broken for us, so the sooner we address that the better. >
++ > > > >> As soon as Juno begins, we can switch 1.2.2+ on UCA and request Ubuntu > >> folks to push the verified version where we can use it. > ++ > > > > This basically re-raises the question of /what/ we should be testing in > > the gate, which was discussed on this list a few weeks ago, and I'm not > > clear that there was a definite decision in that thread > > > > > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-February/027734.html > > > > Testing the lowest vs highest is targetting two different scenarios > > > > - Testing the lowest version demonstrates that OpenStack has not > > broken its own code by introducing use of a new feature. > > > > - Testing the highest version demonstrates that OpenStack has not > > been broken by 3rd party code introducing a regression. > > > > I think it is in scope for openstack to be targetting both of these > > scenarios. For anything in-between though, it is upto the downstream > > vendors to test their precise combination of versions. Currently though > > our testing policy for non-python bits is "whatever version ubuntu > ships", > > which may be neither the lowest or highest versions, just some arbitrary > > version they wish to support. So this discussion is currently more of a > > 'what ubuntu version should we test on' kind of decision > > I think testing 2 versions of libvirt in the gate is adding a matrix > dimension that we currently can't really support. We're just going to > have to pick one per release and be fine with it (at least for icehouse). > > If people want other versions tested, please come in with 3rd party ci > on it. > > We can revisit the big test matrix at summit about the combinations > we're going to actually validate, because with the various limitations > we've got (concurrency limits, quota limits, upstream package limits, > kinds of tests we want to run) we're going to have to make a bunch of > compromises. Testing something new is going to require throwing existing > stuff out of the test path. > I think this is definitely worth revisiting at the summit, but I think we should move Juno to Libvirt 1.2.2+ as soon as possible instead of gating on a 2 year old release, and at the summit we can sort out what the full test matrix can be. As a side note tripleo uses libvirt from Saucy (1.1.1) so moving to latest libvirt would help support them. > > -Sean > > -- > Sean Dague > Samsung Research America > s...@dague.net / sean.da...@samsung.com > http://dague.net > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev