Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][qa] libvirt + LXC CI - where's the beef?

2015-08-25 Thread Matt Riedemann



On 8/20/2015 10:42 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote:



On 8/20/2015 5:33 AM, John Garbutt wrote:

On 20 August 2015 at 03:08, Matt Riedemann
mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:

After spending a few hours on
https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1370590
I'm annoyed by the fact we don't yet have a CI system for testing
libvirt +
LXC.


Bit thank you for raising this one.


At the Juno midcycle in Portland I thought I remember some guy(s) from
Rackspace talking about getting a CI job running, whatever happened with
that?


Now you mention it, I remember that.
I haven't heard any news about that, let me poke some people.


It seems like we should be able to get this going using community infra,
right?  Just need some warm bodies to get the parts together and
figure out
which Tempest tests can't be run with that setup - but we have the
hypervisor support matrix to help us out as a starter.


+1


It also seems unfair to require third party CI for libvirt + parallels
(virtuozzo) but we don't have the same requirement for LXC.


The original excuse was that it didn't bring much value, as most of
the LXC differences were in libvirt.
But given the recent bugs that have cropped up, that is totally the
wrong call.

I think we need to add a log message saying:
LXC support is untested, and will be removed during Mitka if we do
not get a CI in place.

Following the rules here:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/HypervisorSupportMatrix/DeprecationPlan#Specific_Requirements


Does that make sense?

John

PS
I must to kick off the feature classification push, so we can get
discuss that for real at the summit.

Really I am looking for folks to help with that, help monitor what
bits of the support matrix are actually tested.

__

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



To recap from today's nova meeting, apmelton provided the simple localrc
[1] for getting devstack setup with lxc.

He noted that there are some known issues, however:

1. nbd isn't installed by default in devstack - I think this goes back
to the nbd + neutron ubuntu kernel panic on 12.04 back in the
havana/icehouse timeframe.  He also said that nbd appears to leak
resources.  I'm not entirely sure at this point if we can use something
other than nbd like guestfs or the loop mount stuff if the image format
is 'raw'.  We'll have to tinker.  It also sounds like Rackspace has some
patches to workaround the nbd issues and apmelton was going to look at
upstreaming those.

2. There is some weird intermittent issue where the network on the
public interface just drops.

--

The rough plan is for me to try and get a project-config change started
for an lxc job that we can run in nova's experimental queue.  We'll keep
the blacklisted tempest tests in the nova tree like we do for cells.

I'll probably need help with any devstack changes required.

[1] https://gist.github.com/ramielrowe/081deaf0c6b79aec6890



I've started an etherpad to track the work needed to get an lxc job 
going in nova's experimental queue:


https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-lxc-ci

--

Thanks,

Matt Riedemann


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][qa] libvirt + LXC CI - where's the beef?

2015-08-25 Thread Tim Bell
 
 I've started an etherpad to track the work needed to get an lxc job going in
 nova's experimental queue:
 
 https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-lxc-ci
 
 --

Thanks...we would really appreciate the LXC testing.

 this is great to see. While there is a lot of discussions around containers, 
an LXC driver is very interesting where we are looking full machine containers. 
With HPC, this has a very low overhead but allows consistent accounting, quota 
and admin roles.

 Thanks,
 
 Matt Riedemann
 
 
 __
 
 OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
 Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-
 requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][qa] libvirt + LXC CI - where's the beef?

2015-08-20 Thread John Garbutt
On 20 August 2015 at 03:08, Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
 After spending a few hours on https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1370590
 I'm annoyed by the fact we don't yet have a CI system for testing libvirt +
 LXC.

Bit thank you for raising this one.

 At the Juno midcycle in Portland I thought I remember some guy(s) from
 Rackspace talking about getting a CI job running, whatever happened with
 that?

Now you mention it, I remember that.
I haven't heard any news about that, let me poke some people.

 It seems like we should be able to get this going using community infra,
 right?  Just need some warm bodies to get the parts together and figure out
 which Tempest tests can't be run with that setup - but we have the
 hypervisor support matrix to help us out as a starter.

+1

 It also seems unfair to require third party CI for libvirt + parallels
 (virtuozzo) but we don't have the same requirement for LXC.

The original excuse was that it didn't bring much value, as most of
the LXC differences were in libvirt.
But given the recent bugs that have cropped up, that is totally the wrong call.

I think we need to add a log message saying:
LXC support is untested, and will be removed during Mitka if we do
not get a CI in place.

Following the rules here:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/HypervisorSupportMatrix/DeprecationPlan#Specific_Requirements

Does that make sense?

John

PS
I must to kick off the feature classification push, so we can get
discuss that for real at the summit.

Really I am looking for folks to help with that, help monitor what
bits of the support matrix are actually tested.

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][qa] libvirt + LXC CI - where's the beef?

2015-08-20 Thread Matt Riedemann



On 8/20/2015 5:33 AM, John Garbutt wrote:

On 20 August 2015 at 03:08, Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:

After spending a few hours on https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1370590
I'm annoyed by the fact we don't yet have a CI system for testing libvirt +
LXC.


Bit thank you for raising this one.


At the Juno midcycle in Portland I thought I remember some guy(s) from
Rackspace talking about getting a CI job running, whatever happened with
that?


Now you mention it, I remember that.
I haven't heard any news about that, let me poke some people.


It seems like we should be able to get this going using community infra,
right?  Just need some warm bodies to get the parts together and figure out
which Tempest tests can't be run with that setup - but we have the
hypervisor support matrix to help us out as a starter.


+1


It also seems unfair to require third party CI for libvirt + parallels
(virtuozzo) but we don't have the same requirement for LXC.


The original excuse was that it didn't bring much value, as most of
the LXC differences were in libvirt.
But given the recent bugs that have cropped up, that is totally the wrong call.

I think we need to add a log message saying:
LXC support is untested, and will be removed during Mitka if we do
not get a CI in place.

Following the rules here:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/HypervisorSupportMatrix/DeprecationPlan#Specific_Requirements

Does that make sense?


There should at least be a quality warning that it's untested.  I can 
push that up today.




John

PS
I must to kick off the feature classification push, so we can get
discuss that for real at the summit.

Really I am looking for folks to help with that, help monitor what
bits of the support matrix are actually tested.

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



--

Thanks,

Matt Riedemann


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


[openstack-dev] [nova][qa] libvirt + LXC CI - where's the beef?

2015-08-19 Thread Matt Riedemann
After spending a few hours on 
https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1370590 I'm annoyed by the fact we 
don't yet have a CI system for testing libvirt + LXC.


At the Juno midcycle in Portland I thought I remember some guy(s) from 
Rackspace talking about getting a CI job running, whatever happened with 
that?


It seems like we should be able to get this going using community infra, 
right?  Just need some warm bodies to get the parts together and figure 
out which Tempest tests can't be run with that setup - but we have the 
hypervisor support matrix to help us out as a starter.


It also seems unfair to require third party CI for libvirt + parallels 
(virtuozzo) but we don't have the same requirement for LXC.


What gives?!

--

Thanks,

Matt Riedemann


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev