[Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call for patch review!!

Scott Little scott.little at windriver.com
Wed Jun 10 13:20:37 UTC 2020


CENGN cycles aren't a problem.  People resources is a challenge.

So the ask is for a manual build, on CENGN, adding in the nine patches 
listed by https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:for_ussuri+(status:open).

.. and the addition of two repos to the build-stx-base.sh step

build-stx-base.sh
    --repo local-stx-build,... \
    --repo stx-distro,... \
    --repo ussuri-ceph,http://download.ceph.com/rpm-mimic/el7/x86_64/ \
    --repo ussuri-wsgi,http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/sclo/x86_64/rh/


Is that correct?

Scott


On 2020-06-09 9:04 a.m., Saul Wold wrote:
>
> Frank, Scott, Davelet:
>
> Are there cycles available on Cengn (and people resources) to do a 
> Cengn build with the Ussuri patch set applied?  I know this is 
> different than a branch build.  I think we have done this kind of 
> thing in the past.
>
> This might help to make sure we don't have any more Cengn build issues 
> and could give the Test team a sanity spin with a Ussuri/Cengn build.
>
> Note there is a comment for Scott/Davelet at the bottom of Zhipeng's 
> email.
>
> Thanks
>   Sau!
>
>
> On 6/9/20 1:39 AM, Liu, ZhipengS wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> So far, all block issues and concerns have been addressed.
>> Since we have passed all sanity test, and Ussuri OpenStack has been 
>> officially released last month,
>> there should be no more reason to block these patches merge.
>>
>> Next step:
>> Let's push to get ussuri upgrade/openstack-helm rebasing patches 
>> merged. We need great help from core guys!
>> https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:for_ussuri+(status:open)
>>
>> # Below 6 patches are for OpenStack-helm/infra rebase. (we set first 
>> patch with workflow-1 and add depends-on for other patches as we need 
>> to merge them together.)
>> Upgrade openstack-helm-infra zhipeng liu    
>> starlingx/openstack-armada-app       workflow-1
>> Add mariadb database config override to support ipv6 zhipeng liu    
>> starlingx/openstack-armada-app
>> Fix render error in cinder during openstack-helm rebase zhipeng 
>> liu    starlingx/openstack-armada-app
>> Update download list for openstack-helm upgrade zhipeng liu    
>> starlingx/openstack-armada-app
>> Update manifest.yaml file for openstack-helm upgrade.                
>> zhipeng liu starlingx/openstack-armada-app
>> Upgrade openstack-helm zhipeng liu    starlingx/openstack-armada-app
>>
>> # Below 3 patches is for OpenStack upgrade.
>> Update manifest.yaml file for ussuri openstack                      
>> YU CHENGDE starlingx/openstack-armada-app
>> Modify build-tools and stable-wheels for Ussuri upgrading    YU 
>> CHENGDE    starlingx/root
>> Upgrade openstack docker images for stable/ussuri        YU 
>> CHENGDE    starlingx/upstream
>>
>>
>> After removing required python3 dependent packages from local, we can 
>> build out base image and OpenStack service images successfully with 
>> below command.
>> =============================================================================== 
>>
>> @Scott, please help to update cengn build script with below 2 
>> additional repos and help to trigger image build
>> build-stx-base.sh
>>    --repo local-stx-build,... \
>>    --repo stx-distro,... \
>>    --repo ussuri-ceph,http://download.ceph.com/rpm-mimic/el7/x86_64/ \
>>    --repo ussuri-wsgi,http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/sclo/x86_64/rh/
>>
>> Thanks a lot!
>> Zhipeng
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS
>> Sent: 2020年6月8日 16:54
>> To: 'Miller, Frank' <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Friesen, Chris 
>> <Chris.Friesen at windriver.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>> It is not easy to figure out whether/how/when OpenStack-helm-info 
>> upstream introduce this issue and then fix it.
>> I also could not find any fix in LP[1], which just mentioned that 
>> this intermittent issue not hit us after some changes in related field.
>>
>> Anyhow, below 2 patches should fix potential bug and I could not see 
>> the same error log again in our ussuri upgrade EB.
>> https://review.opendev.org/#/c/704034/ Prevent splitbrain during full 
>> Galera restart https://review.opendev.org/#/c/708071/ mariadb: avoid 
>> state management thread death
>>
>> Since we have passed fully test, we'd better push to merge ussuri 
>> upgrade/openstack-helm rebasing patches soon.
>> https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:for_ussuri+(status:open)
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1816842/
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Zhipeng
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>
>> Sent: 2020年6月5日 22:32
>> To: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Friesen, Chris 
>> <Chris.Friesen at windriver.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Zhipeng:
>>
>> This looks promising.  Your theory is that the 2 openstack-helm-infra 
>> patches will fix the mariadb recovery issues.  These 2 patches were 
>> merged in the openstack-helm-infra project in January and February of 
>> 2020.   What would be good to know is what broke mariadb recovery 
>> between April of 2019 when Chris Friesen finished up his story [1] 
>> and our current loads today.  The most likely explanation is the 
>> upversion of Train or the upversion to openstack-helm-infra done in 
>> November 2019 introduced the mariadb recovery issues.  And then the 
>> openstack-helm folks found and fixed the issue earlier in 2020.
>>
>> If we had more time the preferred approach would be to merge just the 
>> openstack-helm-infra changes first to prove they address mariadb 
>> recovery and then in a separate commit merge Ussuri.  But since you 
>> have validated that mariadb recovers with your Ussuri branch and this 
>> branch has these openstack-helm commits, I support letting Ussuri 
>> merge into stx.4.0.
>>
>> Frank
>> [1] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2004712
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>
>> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 2:36 AM
>> To: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Friesen, Chris 
>> <Chris.Friesen at windriver.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>> As for OpenStack not recovering after both controllers are reset [1] 
>> I could not reproduce this issue with my Ussuri upgrade EB.
>> My test step is:
>> 1) ssh to standby controller and sudo reboot -f for it.
>> 2) sudo reboot -f for activated controller All pods can resume after 
>> a while.
>>
>> However, I could reproduce this issue with DB 20200516T080009Z.
>>  From error logs,  it is an old issue analyzed by Chris Friesen in 
>> [2] early last year.
>>
>> In ussuri upgrade EB, we rebased openstack-helm-infra/mariadb.
>> It includes below 2 patches which fixed this stability issue.
>> https://review.opendev.org/#/c/704034/ Prevent splitbrain during full 
>> Galera restart https://review.opendev.org/#/c/708071/ mariadb: avoid 
>> state management thread death
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1881899
>> [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1816842/comments/3
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Zhipeng
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>
>> Sent: 2020年6月3日 22:35
>> To: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Church, Robert 
>> <Robert.Church at windriver.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Zhipeng:
>>
>> This is not a new requirement.  Users expect the software to recover 
>> when resets occur.
>>
>> As I had mentioned at the PTG yesterday I know personally that this 
>> test passed in stx3.0 before the upversion to train. Someone else who 
>> performs testing can look to determine when this test was done as 
>> part of feature testing after train was delivered as it should have 
>> been tested as part of stx.3.0 as well.  I do not know when this 
>> started to break.  One topic we will discuss at the PTG tomorrow will 
>> be how to improve our test coverage and automation so this type of 
>> issue can be found immediately as new code is being delivered.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2020 10:28 AM
>> To: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Church, Robert 
>> <Robert.Church at windriver.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Frank,
>>
>> Have we pass this case before?  Is it a new requirement?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Zhipeng
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>
>> Sent: 2020年6月3日 22:12
>> To: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; Liu, ZhipengS 
>> <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; 
>> Church, Robert <Robert.Church at windriver.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Yong/Zhipeng - the LP for openstack not recovering after both 
>> controllers are reset is 
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1881899
>>
>> Ovidiu is investigating and will provide any updates from his 
>> investigation.  Please continue to keep us informed of your 
>> investigation.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2020 10:38 PM
>> To: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Church, Robert 
>> <Robert.Church at windriver.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> We used a build from May 28.
>>
>> As for the decoupling issue these are actively being worked.  If you 
>> run the system helm-override-show command when the stx-openstack app 
>> is applied you won’t see the CLI command fail.  It only fails when 
>> you try a helm-override-show when the app is in uploaded state.  In 
>> any case this will be fixed shortly.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2020 10:04 PM
>> To: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Church, Robert 
>> <Robert.Church at windriver.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>> Thanks for your quick update!
>> Which build are you using to test this case?
>> Since decoupling commits introduced several regressions (at least 
>> 2),  not propose to do this kind of stability test with latest build.
>> BTW, do we have plan to revert them considering this stability risk?  
>> Our Ussuri upgrade patches is waiting for it☹
>>
>> Furthermore, we have not seen this test case that force reboot both 
>> controllers at the same time. Is it a new requirement?  If not , have 
>> we pass this case before, which build?
>> I'd like to help on it with the pass build for comparative analysis. 
>> From my point , mariadb might not work if we reboot both controllers.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Zhipeng
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>
>> Sent: 2020年6月3日 8:55
>> To: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; Liu, ZhipengS 
>> <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; 
>> Church, Robert <Robert.Church at windriver.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Zhipeng:
>>
>> An update on our testing and analysis today.  We are able to 
>> reproduce the issue with OpenStack not recovering when we trigger a 
>> reboot of both AIO controllers at the same time.  This results in 
>> MariaDB and multiple other OpenStack pods in CrashLoopBackoff and 
>> openstack commands not working indefinitely after the controllers 
>> recover.  We'll create a launchpad tomorrow to track this issue.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2020 12:25 PM
>> To: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Church, Robert 
>> <Robert.Church at windriver.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Thanks Zhipeng for the analysis.  What is challenging here is the 
>> multitude of issues.
>>
>> In our debug of openstack the past few days we are seeing the app 
>> fail completely.  After investigation this issue is a Day 1 
>> containerd issue.  This is tracked in LP: 
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1881353
>>
>> The issue you are seeing on a swact is a new and very recent issue 
>> tied to the decoupling commits that were merged late last week.  Bob 
>> is investigating and I expect he'll have a fix soon for that.
>>
>> But the issues we are most concerned with are when we see mariadb 
>> crashing and not able to recover or with openstack services not 
>> working for longer periods of time.  We're attempting to isolate the 
>> sequence of events that trigger this.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2020 11:47 AM
>> To: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Church, Robert 
>> <Robert.Church at windriver.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> For LP https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1881454
>>              Unable to unlock controller after swact and lock w/ 
>> openstack applied I also tested with daily build 20200516T080009Z. 
>> However, it could not be reproduced.
>> We should  fix this regression ASAP!
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Zhipeng
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>
>> Sent: 2020年6月2日 16:48
>> To: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Church, Robert 
>> <Robert.Church at windriver.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Hi Frank and all,
>>
>> Update for issue 2.
>> I raised a new LP to track it.
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1881722
>> Below is the time statistics. It seems reasonable. No obvious issue 
>> found.
>> 1) 3~4min for host restart and get ready.
>> 2) 2~3min for mariadb terminating, initialization, get ready. (then 
>> configmap sync is ready)
>> 3) 2min for ovs-db ready (reduce probe live/ready timer can improve a 
>> little, as it can retry quickly to connect ovs-vsctl: 
>> unix:/var/run/openvswitch/db.sock)
>> 4) 1min for other pods ready, like neutron-ovs-agent which depends on 
>> ovs-db. ) Any comment?
>>
>> For LP https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1881454
>>              Unable to unlock controller after swact and lock w/ 
>> openstack applied
>>     And  https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1881711
>>              system helm-override-show stx-openstack mariadb 
>> openstack crash  It seems related to openstack plugin decouple 
>> related patches. Should be a regression.
>>   Please see our update in this 2 LPs for detail info.  @Bob, could 
>> you pls help further check it and your patches, thanks!
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Zhipeng
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS
>> Sent: 2020年6月1日 16:20
>> To: 'Miller, Frank' <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; 
>> 'starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io' 
>> <starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io>; Jascanu, Nicolae 
>> <nicolae.jascanu at intel.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>> I also tested the issue 2 with latest daily build on duplex setup.
>> The conclusion is that the issue is there all the time.
>> This issue might not be fixed soon, but should not block OpenStack 
>> upgrade, right?
>>
>> For 9 OpenStack patches below, I have removed all workflow-1, except 
>> the first patch and add depends-on all them.
>> https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:for_ussuri+(status:open)
>> Your review and comments are welcome!
>>
>> As for issue 2, some detail info FYI.
>> It also needs to wait for around 10 min before all pods are ready 
>> again after reboot for master build.
>> It stuck on below 2 pods for 10 min. The same as the one I saw with 
>> my OpenStack upgrade engineering build.
>>       neutron-ovs-agent-controller-0-937646f6-xxznw(depends 
>> openvswitch-db)
>>       openvswitch-db-8fxkw
>> Related key logs below.
>>    Warning  FailedMount  2m19s              kubelet, controller-1  
>> MountVolume.SetUp failed for volume "openvswitch-db-token-7g4qk" : 
>> failed to sync secret cache: timed out waiting for the condition
>>    Warning  FailedMount  2m19s              kubelet, controller-1  
>> MountVolume.SetUp failed for volume "openvswitch-bin" : failed to 
>> sync configmap cache: timed out waiting for the condition
>>    Warning  FailedMount  105s               kubelet, controller-1  
>> MountVolume.SetUp failed for volume "openvswitch-db-token-7g4qk" : 
>> failed to sync secret cache: timed out waiting for the condition
>>    Warning  FailedMount  105s               kubelet, controller-1  
>> MountVolume.SetUp failed for volume "openvswitch-bin" : failed to 
>> sync configmap cache: timed out waiting for the condition
>>    Warning  Unhealthy    30s                kubelet, controller-1  
>> Liveness probe failed: ovs-vsctl: unix:/var/run/openvswitch/db.sock: 
>> database connection failed (Permission denied)
>>    Warning  Unhealthy    7s                 kubelet, controller-1  
>> Readiness probe failed: ovs-vsctl: unix:/var/run/openvswitch/db.sock: 
>> database connection failed (Permission denied)
>>
>> Is it the same stability issue as the one reported from your test 
>> team?  I can only see this issue after force rebooting. What is our 
>> expected recovery time?
>> Your comment is appreciated!
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Zhipeng
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS
>> Sent: 2020年5月29日 9:42
>> To: 'Miller, Frank' <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Jascanu, Nicolae 
>> <nicolae.jascanu at intel.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>> Glad to see your quick reply!!
>> For OpenStack upgrade task, we have finished all test and get patches 
>> ready for more than 2 weeks, but no any review comments and feedback 
>> from your side.  What's the next step?
>>
>> For issue # 2,  in community meeting notes,  I saw that you had some 
>> stability issue from WR local test team. But so far, I do not see any 
>> LP for the detail info. You should ask them to do that!  Right?
>>
>> According to your concern, I tried to reproduce it with my build 
>> (cherry pick OpenStack upgrade patches)yesterday, and the original 
>> issue [1] was not seen any more, mariadb got ready quickly, no 
>> regression.
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855474
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Zhipeng
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>
>> Sent: 2020年5月29日 1:07
>> To: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Jascanu, Nicolae 
>> <nicolae.jascanu at intel.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Thanks Zhipeng.
>>
>> Good to see progress on IPv6.
>> Waiting for 10 minutes for pods to recover isn't a good result. Is 
>> there a LP open on this issue?  Which pods are not ready? What can 
>> you tell us about this 10 minute outage?
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 5:06 AM
>> To: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Jascanu, Nicolae 
>> <nicolae.jascanu at intel.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>> Nicolae already added test case description. Thanks Nicolae!
>>
>> I also did below test on AIO-DX virtual setup, exactly according to 
>> your mentioned steps.
>> No issue found, but just need to wait for around 10 min before all 
>> pods are ready again after reboot.
>>
>> For ipv6 issue, I have submitted new patch for it since dynamic 
>> override for database config did not work.
>>   https://review.opendev.org/#/c/731461/
>>   https://review.opendev.org/#/c/731470/
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Zhipeng
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>
>> Sent: 2020年5月27日 22:43
>> To: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Jascanu, Nicolae 
>> <nicolae.jascanu at intel.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Zhipeng:
>>
>> Thanks for the info.  You have provided the # of testcases but not 
>> what those testcase do.  Where can I find a description of what the 
>> OpenStack testcases do?
>>
>> For the controller reset testcases I'd like to see the test result 
>> for the following:
>> Is openstack usable during the following scenarios on AIO-DX and on 
>> Standard configurations:
>> - Lock/unlock of standby controller
>> - reset (ie: reboot -f) of the standby controller
>> - reset (ie: reboot -f) of the active controller
>> - reapply of stx-openstack after the above scenarios
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2020 9:15 AM
>> To: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Jascanu, Nicolae 
>> <nicolae.jascanu at intel.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>> We have done below tests.
>> 1) Sanity tests by Nicolae.
>> AIO - Simplex
>> Setup                                    04 TCs [PASS]
>> Provisioning                       01 TCs [PASS]
>> Sanity OpenStack             49 TCs [PASS]
>> Sanity Platform                 07 TCs [PASS]
>>
>> TOTAL: [ 61 TCs ]
>>
>> AIO - Duplex
>> Setup                                    04 TCs [PASS]
>> Provisioning                       01 TCs [PASS]
>> Sanity OpenStack             52 TCs [PASS]
>> Sanity Platform                 07 TCs [PASS]
>>
>> TOTAL: [ 64 TCs ]
>>
>> Standard - Local Storage (2+2)
>> Setup                                    04 TCs [PASS]
>> Provisioning                       01 TCs [PASS]
>> Sanity OpenStack             52 TCs [PASS]
>> Sanity Platform                 08 TCs [PASS]
>>
>> TOTAL: [ 65 TCs ]
>>
>> Standard External - Dedicated Storage (2+2+2)
>> Setup                                    04 TCs [PASS]
>> Provisioning                       01 TCs [PASS]
>> Sanity OpenStack             52 TCs [PASS]
>> Sanity Platform                 09 TCs [PASS]
>>
>> TOTAL: [ 66 TCs ]
>>
>> 2) NFV scenario test by me
>>      on duplex/multi standard virtual setup
>>            duplex bare metal setup
>> ===== Setup 
>> =================================================================================================================================
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.524  Create flavor small 
>> ........................................ [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.524  Create flavor small_ephemeral 
>> .............................. [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.524  Create flavor small_swap 
>> ................................... [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.524  Create flavor small_ephemeral_swap 
>> ......................... [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.524  Create flavor medium 
>> ....................................... [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.524  Create flavor medium_ephemeral 
>> ............................. [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.524  Create flavor medium_swap 
>> .................................. [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.524  Create flavor medium_ephemeral_swap 
>> ........................ [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.653  Create image cirros 
>> ........................................ [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.695  Create volume cirros 
>> ....................................... [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.695  Create volume cirros-ephemeral 
>> ............................. [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.695  Create volume cirros-swap 
>> .................................. [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.695  Create volume cirros-ephemeral-swap 
>> ........................ [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.695  Create volume empty_volume 
>> ................................. [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:05.786  Create network internal 
>> .................................... [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:06.158  Create network external 
>> .................................... [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:06.772  Create subnet internal 
>> ..................................... [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:07.661  Create subnet external 
>> ..................................... [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:08.553  Create instance cirros-1 
>> ................................... [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:29.918  Create instance cirros-ephemeral-1 
>> ......................... [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:43.160  Create instance cirros-swap-1 
>> .............................. [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:30:56.101  Create instance cirros-ephemeral-swap-1  
>> .................... [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:31:09.077  Create instance cirros-image-1 
>> ............................. [OKAY]
>> 2020-05-14 02:31:21.241  Create instance cirros-image-with-volumes-1  
>> ................ [OKAY] 
>> =============================================================================================================================================
>> ===== Test Iteration 0 (single-execution) 
>> ===================================================================================================
>> 2020-05-14 02:33:04.172  Test Instance-Pause 
>> ........................................ [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 
>> 02:33:18.078 Δ=0:00:12.870)
>> 2020-05-14 02:33:35.073  Test Instance-Unpause 
>> ...................................... [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 
>> 02:33:41.608 Δ=0:00:05.866)
>> 2020-05-14 02:33:53.049  Test Instance-Suspend 
>> ...................................... [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 
>> 02:33:59.546 Δ=0:00:05.792)
>> 2020-05-14 02:34:11.103  Test Instance-Resume 
>> ....................................... [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 
>> 02:34:17.756 Δ=0:00:05.937)
>> 2020-05-14 02:34:29.269  Test Instance-Reboot (soft) 
>> ................................ [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 02:36:45.923 
>> Δ=0:02:15.748)
>> 2020-05-14 02:37:02.160  Test Instance-Reboot (hard) 
>> ................................ [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 02:37:14.504 
>> Δ=0:00:11.704)
>> 2020-05-14 02:37:30.673  Test Instance-Stop 
>> ......................................... [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 
>> 02:38:44.543 Δ=0:01:13.220)
>> 2020-05-14 02:39:00.481  Test Instance-Start 
>> ........................................ [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 
>> 02:39:07.198 Δ=0:00:06.068)
>> 2020-05-14 02:39:18.578  Test Instance-Live-Migrate 
>> ................................. [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 02:39:41.692 
>> Δ=0:00:22.306)
>> 2020-05-14 02:39:57.927  Test Instance-Cold-Migrate 
>> ................................. [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 02:41:22.720 
>> Δ=0:01:24.179)
>> 2020-05-14 02:41:38.995  Test Instance-Cold-Migrate-Confirm 
>> ......................... [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 02:41:45.441 
>> Δ=0:00:05.884)
>> 2020-05-14 02:41:57.108  Test Instance-Cold-Migrate-Revert 
>> .......................... [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 02:43:36.381 
>> Δ=0:00:21.637)
>> 2020-05-14 02:43:52.320  Test Instance-Resize 
>> ....................................... [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 
>> 02:45:16.409 Δ=0:01:22.812)
>> 2020-05-14 02:45:32.723  Test Instance-Resize-Confirm 
>> ............................... [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 02:45:39.119 
>> Δ=0:00:05.777)
>> 2020-05-14 02:45:50.437  Test Instance-Resize-Revert 
>> ................................ [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 02:47:30.175 
>> Δ=0:00:21.748)
>> 2020-05-14 02:47:46.230  Test Instance-Rebuild 
>> ...................................... [OKAY]  (2020-05-14 
>> 02:48:59.762 Δ=0:01:12.980)
>> Total-Tests: 16     Execution-Time: 0:16:11.676
>>
>> 3) Another 2 test
>>      a) Using IPv6
>>           It can pass with workaround now.  I need one more fix for it.
>>           In my previous patch https://review.opendev.org/#/c/716524 
>> (merged), I dynamically override below
>>              config_override: |
>>                  [mysqld]
>>                  bind_address=::
>>           However, it did not work now. From log,  it shows error 
>> "OpenStack-Helm Mariadb - INFO - b'error: Found option without 
>> preceding group in config file: /etc/mysql/conf.d/20-override.cnf at 
>> line: 1'"
>>           I tried many methods, but could not remove the first line 
>> in 20-override.cnf
>>                  mysql at mariadb-server-0:/etc/mysql/conf.d$ cat 
>> 20-override.cnf
>>                  |-
>>                  [mysqld]
>>                  bind_address=::
>>          I can only add it in manifest.yaml as a static override like 
>> below.
>>                 values:
>>                    conf:
>>                        database:
>>                            config_override: |
>>                                [mysqld]
>>                                bind_address=::
>>                   b) Reset of controllers and check status of 
>> OpenStack while a controller is rebooting.
>>           I have tested it and pass on simplex.
>>           For duplex, I have a setup issue in my side.
>>           @Jascanu, Nicolae  Could you help me on it for duplex test, 
>> if you have time today. Thanks!
>>
>> Zhipeng
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Miller, Frank <Frank.Miller at windriver.com>
>> Sent: 2020年5月26日 21:13
>> To: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Zhipeng:
>>
>> Can you publish the list of tests that have been run for openstack?
>>
>> Also has openstack been tested for the following scenarios:
>> 1) Using IPv6
>> 2) Reset of controllers and check status of openstack while a 
>> controller is rebooting?
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>
>> Sent: Monday, May 25, 2020 3:14 AM
>> To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We have passed all sanity test on all setup. Thanks Nicolae!!
>> We also built out OpenStack service images from layered build 
>> environment.
>>
>> Please help to review and push below patches to be merged, thanks!
>> https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:for_ussuri+(status:open+OR+status)
>>
>> BRs
>> Zhipeng
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS
>> Sent: 2020年5月14日 16:49
>> To: 'Saul Wold' <sgw at linux.intel.com>; 
>> 'starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io' 
>> <starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io>
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Call for patch review again!
>> https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:for_ussuri+(status:open+OR+status)
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Zhipeng
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Liu, ZhipengS
>> Sent: 2020年5月9日 8:38
>> To: Saul Wold <sgw at linux.intel.com>; 
>> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> Agree!
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Saul Wold <sgw at linux.intel.com>
>> Sent: 2020年5月9日 0:29
>> To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call 
>> for patch review!!
>>
>> I would strengthen that to no changes until we get Green Sanity other 
>> than what's required to make them Green.
>>
>> Full Stop!
>>
>> Sau!
>>
>>
>> On 5/8/20 9:05 AM, Miller, Frank wrote:
>>> Until we can get sanity passing for several days in a row I strongly
>>> suggest we do not allow any further changes into the load related to
>>> OpenStack.  Folks can continue with reviews but let’s hold off
>>> allowing merges related to a new OpenStack version.
>>>
>>> Frank
>>>
>>> *From:*Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>
>>> *Sent:* Friday, May 08, 2020 11:59 AM
>>> *To:* starlingx-discuss <starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io>
>>> *Cc:* YU CHENGDE <yu.chengde at 99cloud.net>; Penney, Don
>>> <Don.Penney at windriver.com>
>>> *Subject:* [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call
>>> for patch review!!
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Please help to review OpenStack Ussuri upgrade patches.
>>>
>>> Our target is to get all below patches merged by end of next week.
>>>
>>> https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:for_ussuri+(status:open+OR+status
>>> :merged)
>>>
>>> During OpenStack upgrade for StarlingX, we have to move python2.7 to
>>> python3.6 for OpenStack services as ussuri release only support 
>>> python3.
>>>
>>> We also rebased openstack-helm/helm-infra to latest version.
>>>
>>> Engineering build test status.
>>>
>>>   1. nfv_scenario_tests PASS on simplex/duplex/multi virtual setup.
>>>   2. nfv_scenario_tests PASS on simplex bare metal setup.
>>>   3. Sanity test is ongoing.   Duplex/standard virtual setup test PASS.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Zhipeng
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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