[Starlingx-discuss] [Stx.distro.openstack] Call for review on OpenStack Train Upgrade Patches.

Wensley, Barton Barton.Wensley at windriver.com
Wed Nov 6 12:47:16 UTC 2019


Yong,

To reply to your comments:

1). we don't upgrade Openstack clients at this time as agreed previously.

The VIM doesn't use the OpenStack clients - it uses the OpenStack REST APIs directly. Often we find that when OpenStack is upversioned there can be things deprecated in the OpenStack REST APIs that break the VIM's use of these APIs.

2). in case we detect some issues caused by Openstack API changes, we 
can either fix them in StarlingX or get resolution from OpenStack upstream.

The fixes would be in StarlingX - not upstream. We would need to update the VIM to use the modified REST APIs. I prefer that we do this testing ahead of time instead of waiting for things to break and fixing the problems after the fact.

Bart

-----Original Message-----
From: Yong Hu [mailto:yong.hu at intel.com] 
Sent: November 5, 2019 10:25 PM
To: Wensley, Barton; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Alonso, Juan Carlos; Liu, ZhipengS; Lemus Contreras, Cristopher J
Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [Stx.distro.openstack] Call for review on OpenStack Train Upgrade Patches.

Bart,
It's a fair requirement, and I would suggest to run this test on the 
build image from Cengn after these patches merged, because:
1). we don't upgrade Openstack clients at this time as agreed previously.
2). in case we detect some issues caused by Openstack API changes, we 
can either fix them in StarlingX or get resolution from OpenStack upstream.

regards,
Yong


On 2019/11/5 11:11 PM, Wensley, Barton wrote:
> Yong,
> 
> Has someone run the VIM automated testing against the new load? See attached email for details.
> 
> Bart
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yong Hu [mailto:yong.hu at intel.com]
> Sent: November 5, 2019 9:47 AM
> To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Alonso, Juan Carlos; Liu, ZhipengS; Lemus Contreras, Cristopher J
> Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [Stx.distro.openstack] Call for review on OpenStack Train Upgrade Patches.
> 
> Hi Core reviewers in Stx.distro.openstack:
> 
> The EB with containerized Train OpenStack services has *passed* the
> sanity, based on test results from testing team. (Thanks to @JC and
> @Chirstopher).
> 
> So to unblock stx.3.0 MS-3, please review the following patches in time:
> 
>       https://review.opendev.org/#/c/683886/
>       https://review.opendev.org/#/c/683910/
>       https://review.opendev.org/#/c/684166/
>       https://review.opendev.org/#/c/687441/
>       https://review.opendev.org/#/c/687197/
>       https://review.opendev.org/#/c/688105/
> 
> In addition, some background info related to this upgrade:
> 
> 1). Originally there was a test failure in the sanity, but later Zhipeng
> found the cause was from an non-standard test (cirros) image which had 2
> QCOW2 headers unexpectedly and failed during the conversion from QCOW2
> to RAW format. Why wasn't this issue seen with OpenStack Stein? Because
> the QCOW2 to RAW conversion wasn't enabled in Nova of Stein, but it is
> now enabled by default in Train.  Recommendation: later for the testing,
> we advise to use this cirros image:
> https://download.cirros-cloud.net/0.4.0/cirros-0.4.0-x86_64-disk.img, or
> other QCOW2 image which we assure it is with correct header.
> 
> 2). these patches have to be merged *in one batch* due to the
> inter-dependencies.
> 
> 3). after these patches are merged, need *stx.build team* to generate
> new docker images for Openstack Train services and *upload them to
> Docker Hub*.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
> 


More information about the Starlingx-discuss mailing list