From Frank.Miller at windriver.com Sat Aug 1 01:39:15 2020 From: Frank.Miller at windriver.com (Miller, Frank) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2020 01:39:15 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Containerization meeting cancelled for August 4 Message-ID: Please note that the next Starling Containerization meeting planned for Tuesday August 4th is cancelled. Frank -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Sat Aug 1 04:57:54 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2020 04:57:54 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity RC 4.0 Test LAYERED build ISO 20200731T134418Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-July-31 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200731T134418Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200731T134418Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Sat Aug 1 13:08:28 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2020 13:08:28 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200801T013425Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-1 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200801T013425Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200801T013425Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: From scott.little at windriver.com Sun Aug 2 18:37:33 2020 From: scott.little at windriver.com (Scott Little) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2020 14:37:33 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Minutes: StarlingX Release Meeting - July 30/2020 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Builds have been stopped. Awaiting word that we are happy with the load and good to tag. Scott On 2020-07-31 3:50 p.m., Khalil, Ghada wrote: > Agenda/Minutes are posted at: > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-releases > > stx.4.0 > - Feature Test Update > - Openstack Rebase to Ussuri > - 4 TCs run successfully on stx master, but not on the rc/4.0 branch > - Need to trigger a container build on the 4.0 branch. Action: Frank/Scott > > - Regression Test Status > - Done > > - Bugs > - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bugs?field.tag=stx.4.0&orderby=-importance&start=0 > - Agreed to deter 7 bugs to a future stx.4.0 maintenance release > - Openstack: 5, DC: 1, Containers: 1 > > - Cherry-pick > - Frank to follow up with Scott on the following cherrypick > - https://review.opendev.org/#/c/743712/ > - Either merge before tongiht's build or re-gate to stx.5.0 and abandon the review > > - Release Delivery Plan > - 7/30: Build ISO and docker images tonight > - 7/31: Run sanity and confirm Openstack metrics TCs are working w/ new docker image > - 7/31: Send email out to stop merges to the branch. Stop nightly builds > - 7/31: Tag the branch and move the rc build to the release location > - TBD whether this finishes in one day or goes into next week > > - Release Notes The draft RN are in this review: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742989/ > - We're looking for input/suggestions for the Bug fixes and Known limitations sections: > - Bug fixes has a link to all the LP fixed in R4 - any bugs that need to be highlighted? > - Known limitations has placeholder text - any specific workarounds/issues to add here? > - Need others to review. Ghada will review today. > - Future: Doc team to add the blank release notes early in stx.5.0 so that dev primes can add descriptions for their features as they deliver them > > - Agreed to go ahead with declaring the stx.4.0 release once the above delivery plan is complete > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Mon Aug 3 07:15:33 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 07:15:33 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200802T230422Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-2 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200802T230422Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200802T230422Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: From ruediger.stock at intel.com Mon Aug 3 09:13:36 2020 From: ruediger.stock at intel.com (Stock, Ruediger) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 09:13:36 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Metrics test passed on RC 4.0 ISO 20200731T134418Z Message-ID: This is to announce that the tests related to metrics successfully passed! The load used is http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200731T134418Z/ The plan agreed on the last Release Team Meeting can proceed. Regards, Rüdiger Intel Deutschland GmbH Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Gary Kershaw Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau Registered Office: Munich Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pvmpublic at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 10:03:43 2020 From: pvmpublic at gmail.com (Pratik M.) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 15:33:43 +0530 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] bnx2x driver panic. Is source same as CentOS 7? Message-ID: Hi, I see a bnx2x driver panic during install of controller-1. Where do I find the driver source for the same to confirm whether this is stock from CentOS 7 or are there any changes? If it is the same as CentOS, then I presume there is no point raising a bug in StarlingX LP? I have installed CentOS7 on the same hardware (albeit not via pxe from the same broadcom "custer mgmt" NIC). I see a lot of these: bnx2x: [bnx2x_write_dmae:549(eno51)]DMAE returned failure -1 NIC is HP 536FLB which is QLogic 57840S Thanks in advance Pratik From ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 14:42:34 2020 From: ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com (Ildiko Vancsa) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 16:42:34 +0200 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0 blog post Message-ID: <676B75BE-6664-4E8F-870B-8532BFF3F9D0@gmail.com> Hi, I typed up a short blog post to highlight some of the 4.0 features. You can check out the PR here: https://github.com/StarlingXWeb/starlingx-website/pull/89 Please let me know if you have any comments or add it to the PR. Thanks and Best Regards, Ildikó From sgw at linux.intel.com Mon Aug 3 17:47:10 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 10:47:10 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Minutes: StarlingX Release Meeting - July 30/2020 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1cfda9ba-3356-9514-c219-94de5eeb574a@linux.intel.com> On 8/2/20 11:37 AM, Scott Little wrote: > Builds have been stopped. > > Awaiting word that we are happy with the load and good to tag. > If I understand correctly, we had a good report from the test team regarding the OpenStack metrics TCs, is there anything else that needs to be followed up on to tag the 4.0 branch (and create the manifests) and then build the 4.0 release from that? Ghada?, Bruce?, TSC? Bueller? Bueller? Sau! > Scott > > > On 2020-07-31 3:50 p.m., Khalil, Ghada wrote: >> Agenda/Minutes are posted at: >> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-releases >> >> stx.4.0 >> - Feature Test Update >>       - Openstack Rebase to Ussuri >>            - 4 TCs run successfully on stx master, but not on the >> rc/4.0 branch >>            - Need to trigger a container build on the 4.0 branch. >> Action: Frank/Scott >> >> - Regression Test Status >>            - Done >> >> - Bugs >>            - >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bugs?field.tag=stx.4.0&orderby=-importance&start=0 >> >>            - Agreed to deter 7 bugs to a future stx.4.0 maintenance >> release >>            - Openstack: 5, DC: 1, Containers: 1 >> >> - Cherry-pick >>            - Frank to follow up with Scott on the following cherrypick >>                  - https://review.opendev.org/#/c/743712/ >>                  - Either merge before tongiht's build or re-gate to >> stx.5.0 and abandon the review >> >> - Release Delivery Plan >>            - 7/30: Build ISO and docker images tonight >>            - 7/31: Run sanity and confirm Openstack metrics TCs are >> working w/ new docker image >>            - 7/31: Send email out to stop merges to the branch. Stop >> nightly builds >>            - 7/31: Tag the branch and move the rc build to the release >> location >>            - TBD whether this finishes in one day or goes into next week >> >> - Release Notes  The draft RN are in this review: >> https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742989/ >>            - We're looking for input/suggestions for the Bug fixes and >> Known limitations sections: >>            - Bug fixes has a link to all the LP fixed in R4 - any bugs >> that need to be highlighted? >>            - Known limitations has placeholder text - any specific >> workarounds/issues to add here? >>            - Need others to review. Ghada will review today. >>            - Future: Doc team to add the blank release notes early in >> stx.5.0 so that dev primes can add descriptions for their features as >> they deliver them >> >> - Agreed to go ahead with declaring the stx.4.0 release once the above >> delivery plan is complete >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 From bruce.e.jones at intel.com Mon Aug 3 17:54:23 2020 From: bruce.e.jones at intel.com (Jones, Bruce E) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 17:54:23 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Minutes: StarlingX Release Meeting - July 30/2020 In-Reply-To: <1cfda9ba-3356-9514-c219-94de5eeb574a@linux.intel.com> References: <1cfda9ba-3356-9514-c219-94de5eeb574a@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: We need to complete the release notes, which are in flight [1]. In particular - more reviews would be great, and the Docs team needs to know what the community wants to do with the "Known Limitations" section which is currently blank. Should we add some? Delete it? Brucej [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742989 -----Original Message----- From: Saul Wold Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 10:47 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Minutes: StarlingX Release Meeting - July 30/2020 On 8/2/20 11:37 AM, Scott Little wrote: > Builds have been stopped. > > Awaiting word that we are happy with the load and good to tag. > If I understand correctly, we had a good report from the test team regarding the OpenStack metrics TCs, is there anything else that needs to be followed up on to tag the 4.0 branch (and create the manifests) and then build the 4.0 release from that? Ghada?, Bruce?, TSC? Bueller? Bueller? Sau! > Scott > > > On 2020-07-31 3:50 p.m., Khalil, Ghada wrote: >> Agenda/Minutes are posted at: >> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-releases >> >> stx.4.0 >> - Feature Test Update >>       - Openstack Rebase to Ussuri >>            - 4 TCs run successfully on stx master, but not on the >> rc/4.0 branch >>            - Need to trigger a container build on the 4.0 branch. >> Action: Frank/Scott >> >> - Regression Test Status >>            - Done >> >> - Bugs >>            - >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bugs?field.tag=stx.4.0&orderby= >> -importance&start=0 >> >>            - Agreed to deter 7 bugs to a future stx.4.0 maintenance >> release >>            - Openstack: 5, DC: 1, Containers: 1 >> >> - Cherry-pick >>            - Frank to follow up with Scott on the following >> cherrypick >>                  - https://review.opendev.org/#/c/743712/ >>                  - Either merge before tongiht's build or re-gate to >> stx.5.0 and abandon the review >> >> - Release Delivery Plan >>            - 7/30: Build ISO and docker images tonight >>            - 7/31: Run sanity and confirm Openstack metrics TCs are >> working w/ new docker image >>            - 7/31: Send email out to stop merges to the branch. Stop >> nightly builds >>            - 7/31: Tag the branch and move the rc build to the >> release location >>            - TBD whether this finishes in one day or goes into next >> week >> >> - Release Notes  The draft RN are in this review: >> https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742989/ >>            - We're looking for input/suggestions for the Bug fixes >> and Known limitations sections: >>            - Bug fixes has a link to all the LP fixed in R4 - any >> bugs that need to be highlighted? >>            - Known limitations has placeholder text - any specific >> workarounds/issues to add here? >>            - Need others to review. Ghada will review today. >>            - Future: Doc team to add the blank release notes early in >> stx.5.0 so that dev primes can add descriptions for their features as >> they deliver them >> >> - Agreed to go ahead with declaring the stx.4.0 release once the >> above delivery plan is complete >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 From sgw at linux.intel.com Mon Aug 3 18:10:58 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 11:10:58 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Minutes: StarlingX Release Meeting - July 30/2020 In-Reply-To: References: <1cfda9ba-3356-9514-c219-94de5eeb574a@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: On 8/3/20 10:54 AM, Jones, Bruce E wrote: > We need to complete the release notes, which are in flight [1]. In particular - more reviews would be great, and the Docs team needs to know what the community wants to do with the "Known Limitations" section which is currently blank. Should we add some? Delete it? Should we mention the 6 or so launchpad issues that were deferred, are there known workarounds for those? Sau! > > Brucej > > [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742989 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Saul Wold > Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 10:47 AM > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Minutes: StarlingX Release Meeting - July 30/2020 > > > > On 8/2/20 11:37 AM, Scott Little wrote: >> Builds have been stopped. >> >> Awaiting word that we are happy with the load and good to tag. >> > If I understand correctly, we had a good report from the test team regarding the OpenStack metrics TCs, is there anything else that needs to be followed up on to tag the 4.0 branch (and create the manifests) and then build the 4.0 release from that? > > Ghada?, Bruce?, TSC? Bueller? Bueller? > > Sau! >> Scott >> >> >> On 2020-07-31 3:50 p.m., Khalil, Ghada wrote: >>> Agenda/Minutes are posted at: >>> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-releases >>> >>> stx.4.0 >>> - Feature Test Update >>>       - Openstack Rebase to Ussuri >>>            - 4 TCs run successfully on stx master, but not on the >>> rc/4.0 branch >>>            - Need to trigger a container build on the 4.0 branch. >>> Action: Frank/Scott >>> >>> - Regression Test Status >>>            - Done >>> >>> - Bugs >>>            - >>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bugs?field.tag=stx.4.0&orderby= >>> -importance&start=0 >>> >>>            - Agreed to deter 7 bugs to a future stx.4.0 maintenance >>> release >>>            - Openstack: 5, DC: 1, Containers: 1 >>> >>> - Cherry-pick >>>            - Frank to follow up with Scott on the following >>> cherrypick >>>                  - https://review.opendev.org/#/c/743712/ >>>                  - Either merge before tongiht's build or re-gate to >>> stx.5.0 and abandon the review >>> >>> - Release Delivery Plan >>>            - 7/30: Build ISO and docker images tonight >>>            - 7/31: Run sanity and confirm Openstack metrics TCs are >>> working w/ new docker image >>>            - 7/31: Send email out to stop merges to the branch. Stop >>> nightly builds >>>            - 7/31: Tag the branch and move the rc build to the >>> release location >>>            - TBD whether this finishes in one day or goes into next >>> week >>> >>> - Release Notes  The draft RN are in this review: >>> https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742989/ >>>            - We're looking for input/suggestions for the Bug fixes >>> and Known limitations sections: >>>            - Bug fixes has a link to all the LP fixed in R4 - any >>> bugs that need to be highlighted? >>>            - Known limitations has placeholder text - any specific >>> workarounds/issues to add here? >>>            - Need others to review. Ghada will review today. >>>            - Future: Doc team to add the blank release notes early in >>> stx.5.0 so that dev primes can add descriptions for their features as >>> they deliver them >>> >>> - Agreed to go ahead with declaring the stx.4.0 release once the >>> above delivery plan is complete >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > From ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 18:21:06 2020 From: ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com (Ildiko Vancsa) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 20:21:06 +0200 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] CFP Deadline Tomorrow - Virtual Open Infrastructure Summit Message-ID: Hi everyone, It’s time to submit your Open Infrastructure virtual Summit presentations[1]! The CFP deadline is tomorrow. Submit sessions featuring StarlingX or any open source projects the community is collaborating with like Airship, Ceph, Kata Containers, Kubernetes, OpenStack and so forth. As a reminder, these are the 2020 Tracks: 5G, NFV & Edge AI, Machine Learning & HPC CI/CD Container Infrastructure Getting Started Hands-on Workshops Open Development Private & Hybrid Cloud Public Cloud Security Get your presentations, panels, and workshops in before August 4 at 11:59 pm PT (August 5 at 6:59 am UTC). The content submission process for the Forum and Project Teams Gathering (PTG) will be managed separately in the upcoming months. The Summit Programming Committee has shared topics by Track for community members interested in speaking at the upcoming Summit. Check out the submission tips[2]! Then don’t forget to register[3] for the virtual Open Infrastructure Summit taking place October 19-23 at no cost to you. Need more time? Reach out to speakersupport at openstack.org with any questions or concerns. Cheers, Ildikó [1] https://cfp.openstack.org/ [2] https://superuser.openstack.org/articles/virtual-open-infrastructure-summit-cfp/ [3] https://openinfrasummit2020.eventbrite.com From bruce.e.jones at intel.com Mon Aug 3 18:25:08 2020 From: bruce.e.jones at intel.com (Jones, Bruce E) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 18:25:08 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0 blog post In-Reply-To: <676B75BE-6664-4E8F-870B-8532BFF3F9D0@gmail.com> References: <676B75BE-6664-4E8F-870B-8532BFF3F9D0@gmail.com> Message-ID: I don't know how to add comments to github, so I'm just going to put them here. Replace: The StarlingX community has just launched the fourth release of the project with various new features and enhancements to the platform. With: The StarlingX community is pleased to announce the 4.0 release with new features and enhancements to the platform. Replace: The project is approaching a half-year release cycle With: The project has a half-year release cycle Overall the post looks very good, thank you for putting it together! brucej -----Original Message----- From: Ildiko Vancsa Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 7:43 AM To: starlingx Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0 blog post Hi, I typed up a short blog post to highlight some of the 4.0 features. You can check out the PR here: https://github.com/StarlingXWeb/starlingx-website/pull/89 Please let me know if you have any comments or add it to the PR. Thanks and Best Regards, Ildikó _______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From maryx.camp at intel.com Mon Aug 3 18:37:33 2020 From: maryx.camp at intel.com (Camp, MaryX) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 18:37:33 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0 blog post In-Reply-To: References: <676B75BE-6664-4E8F-870B-8532BFF3F9D0@gmail.com> Message-ID: I added some editorial comments in github too, let me know if they aren't clear. -----Original Message----- From: Jones, Bruce E Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 2:25 PM To: Ildiko Vancsa ; starlingx Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0 blog post I don't know how to add comments to github, so I'm just going to put them here. Replace: The StarlingX community has just launched the fourth release of the project with various new features and enhancements to the platform. With: The StarlingX community is pleased to announce the 4.0 release with new features and enhancements to the platform. Replace: The project is approaching a half-year release cycle With: The project has a half-year release cycle Overall the post looks very good, thank you for putting it together! brucej -----Original Message----- From: Ildiko Vancsa Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 7:43 AM To: starlingx Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0 blog post Hi, I typed up a short blog post to highlight some of the 4.0 features. You can check out the PR here: https://github.com/StarlingXWeb/starlingx-website/pull/89 Please let me know if you have any comments or add it to the PR. Thanks and Best Regards, Ildikó _______________________________________________ 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 From austin.sun at intel.com Tue Aug 4 05:00:11 2020 From: austin.sun at intel.com (Sun, Austin) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 05:00:11 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Agenda: Weekly StarlingX non-OpenStack distro meeting, 8/5/2020 Message-ID: Hi All: Agenda for 8/5 meeting: - Ceph containerization: Document : https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+project:starlingx/docs+branch:master+topic:ceph-cluster-editorial Patches Call for review: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:%22ceph+containerization%22 - Centos8: The summary how many pkgs are not in currently ISO ---- neusoft team to provide https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1_TQwFsQSiVdsN5xWv4D3jajkmxWiJ3KV?usp=sharing - Open: If any more topic , please add into https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/stx-distro-other Thanks. BR Austin Sun. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 07:43:31 2020 From: ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com (Ildiko Vancsa) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 09:43:31 +0200 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0 blog post In-Reply-To: References: <676B75BE-6664-4E8F-870B-8532BFF3F9D0@gmail.com> Message-ID: <988DFD54-0A89-4526-A7F4-0616FCBEFF58@gmail.com> Thanks for the review and comments, I think I fixed all of them now. Please let me know if you find further issues to fix. Best Regards, Ildikó > On Aug 3, 2020, at 20:37, Camp, MaryX wrote: > > I added some editorial comments in github too, let me know if they aren't clear. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jones, Bruce E > Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 2:25 PM > To: Ildiko Vancsa ; starlingx > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0 blog post > > I don't know how to add comments to github, so I'm just going to put them here. > > Replace: > The StarlingX community has just launched the fourth release of the project with various new features and enhancements to the platform. > With: > The StarlingX community is pleased to announce the 4.0 release with new features and enhancements to the platform. > > Replace: The project is approaching a half-year release cycle > With: The project has a half-year release cycle > > Overall the post looks very good, thank you for putting it together! > > brucej > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ildiko Vancsa > Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 7:43 AM > To: starlingx > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0 blog post > > Hi, > > I typed up a short blog post to highlight some of the 4.0 features. > > You can check out the PR here: https://github.com/StarlingXWeb/starlingx-website/pull/89 > > Please let me know if you have any comments or add it to the PR. > > Thanks and Best Regards, > Ildikó > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From pvmpublic at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 10:12:15 2020 From: pvmpublic at gmail.com (Pratik M.) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:42:15 +0530 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Message-ID: Hi, I am seeing stx-openstack apply failure w/ R3.0. I am following the steps from documentation. Seems others are seeing this too https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1889023 But the "Sanity OpenStack" TC must have passed, so I want to compare my steps with the ones there, to figure out if there is a difference. Can someone point me to either the code or the output of the test cases? Thanks Pratik From Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com Tue Aug 4 13:31:07 2020 From: Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com (Khalil, Ghada) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 13:31:07 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] No good images on July, 30 and 31 In-Reply-To: <7ee20fea-a12a-e7fb-0199-43a77cd0c14f@windriver.com> References: <7ee20fea-a12a-e7fb-0199-43a77cd0c14f@windriver.com> Message-ID: Hi Nick, Can you confirm that the 4.0 built docker images were used in the latest sanity? Did the openstack metrics test-cases pass with the newly built docker images? Thanks, Ghada From: Scott Little [mailto:scott.little at windriver.com] Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 9:55 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] No good images on July, 30 and 31 I have triggered a forced build. The last three scheduled builds detected no new package changes, and aborted the build without producing anything. This is a bit of a problem if the prior container build build produced new docker images that need to be included in helm charts. I'm looking at options to address this going forward. Scott On 2020-07-31 8:39 a.m., Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: Hi All, The sanity and metrics tests were NOT executed today because there is no proper image available: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200730T173039Z/ http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200730T214144Z/ http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200731T070417Z/ Regards, Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. TSD Software Engineer [intel-logo] Internet Of Things Group Galati, Romania _______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 3923 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com Tue Aug 4 13:33:54 2020 From: Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com (Khalil, Ghada) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 13:33:54 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] No good images on July, 30 and 31 In-Reply-To: References: <7ee20fea-a12a-e7fb-0199-43a77cd0c14f@windriver.com> Message-ID: Please ignore this message. I originally missed the email from Rudiger. @Scott, please start tagging. From a load point of view, we are not waiting for anything. Regards, Ghada From: Khalil, Ghada Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2020 9:31 AM To: Scott Little ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Jascanu, Nicolae Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] No good images on July, 30 and 31 Hi Nick, Can you confirm that the 4.0 built docker images were used in the latest sanity? Did the openstack metrics test-cases pass with the newly built docker images? Thanks, Ghada From: Scott Little [mailto:scott.little at windriver.com] Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 9:55 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] No good images on July, 30 and 31 I have triggered a forced build. The last three scheduled builds detected no new package changes, and aborted the build without producing anything. This is a bit of a problem if the prior container build build produced new docker images that need to be included in helm charts. I'm looking at options to address this going forward. Scott On 2020-07-31 8:39 a.m., Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: Hi All, The sanity and metrics tests were NOT executed today because there is no proper image available: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200730T173039Z/ http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200730T214144Z/ http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200731T070417Z/ Regards, Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. TSD Software Engineer [intel-logo] Internet Of Things Group Galati, Romania _______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 3923 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From scott.little at windriver.com Tue Aug 4 14:44:25 2020 From: scott.little at windriver.com (Scott Little) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 10:44:25 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release In-Reply-To: References: <8d028c1f-7a45-6baa-bf42-8991755aeac8@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <70a2d697-60e0-7970-0ff4-10a441d4e93e@windriver.com> We will be creating the 4.0.0 tag toady.  We won't forget docs. On another thread I saw a plea for more doc reviews.  Was there anything that requires us to delay tagging docs?  We could tag everything else and delay tagging docs for a day or two. Scott On 2020-07-29 8:33 p.m., Camp, MaryX wrote: > Hi Scott, > For R4 we branched the starlingx/docs repo. This is a new process for starlingx/docs, so I'm sending a reminder to please be sure it is part of your tagging process. > > thanks, > Mary Camp > PTIGlobal Technical Writer | maryx.camp at intel.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: Saul Wold > Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 11:31 AM > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Scott Little > Cc: Miller, Frank ; Panech, Davlet > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release > > > Scott, > > As you know I looked into both the root/build-tools/branching scripts and the tools/release scripts. I chose the tools/release scripts since they handled the branching better (it created the .gitreview). Both sets of scripts will probably work correctly for tagging, but neither handle the creation of the manifests correctly for the tag and now for layered build also, this would have to be done by hand initially. > > I do have a story[0] and folks assigned to fix the manifest issue, but that won't be fixed by next week. > > I think you are know the basics since you did this for the 3.0 release. > You need to create the 4.0.0 tag for all repos and then create the stx.4.0.0-default.xml (which I guess is what you use for jenkins). I am thinking you will also need to create stx.4.0.0-*.xml for the layered build. All the release specific xml files will need a line. > > There was some discussion about also tagging the ryu and stx-openstack-ras repos, but I am not sure who owns those, for the > stx.4.0 branch, I added a git SHA. > > I might be up and around by Thursday, but with limited time. > > Sau! > > > > [0] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2007926 > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From yang.liu at windriver.com Tue Aug 4 15:18:54 2020 From: yang.liu at windriver.com (Liu, Yang (YOW)) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:18:54 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx-test meeting cancelled today Message-ID: Hi folks, Sorry for the late notice. Stx Test meeting is cancelled for today. If you have any topics to discuss, let's discuss in email for this week. Thanks, Yang -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bruce.e.jones at intel.com Tue Aug 4 15:20:30 2020 From: bruce.e.jones at intel.com (Jones, Bruce E) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:20:30 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release In-Reply-To: <70a2d697-60e0-7970-0ff4-10a441d4e93e@windriver.com> References: <8d028c1f-7a45-6baa-bf42-8991755aeac8@linux.intel.com> <70a2d697-60e0-7970-0ff4-10a441d4e93e@windriver.com> Message-ID: The plea for docs is to review the R4 release notes. There is no need to delay tagging the docs. Please see: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742989 and https://review.opendev.org/#/c/744061 for the docs changes for the R4 release. Reviews and comments welcome! brucej -----Original Message----- From: Scott Little Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 7:44 AM To: Camp, MaryX ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Miller, Frank ; Panech, Davlet Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release We will be creating the 4.0.0 tag toady.  We won't forget docs. On another thread I saw a plea for more doc reviews.  Was there anything that requires us to delay tagging docs?  We could tag everything else and delay tagging docs for a day or two. Scott On 2020-07-29 8:33 p.m., Camp, MaryX wrote: > Hi Scott, > For R4 we branched the starlingx/docs repo. This is a new process for starlingx/docs, so I'm sending a reminder to please be sure it is part of your tagging process. > > thanks, > Mary Camp > PTIGlobal Technical Writer | maryx.camp at intel.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: Saul Wold > Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 11:31 AM > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Scott Little > > Cc: Miller, Frank ; Panech, Davlet > > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release > > > Scott, > > As you know I looked into both the root/build-tools/branching scripts and the tools/release scripts. I chose the tools/release scripts since they handled the branching better (it created the .gitreview). Both sets of scripts will probably work correctly for tagging, but neither handle the creation of the manifests correctly for the tag and now for layered build also, this would have to be done by hand initially. > > I do have a story[0] and folks assigned to fix the manifest issue, but that won't be fixed by next week. > > I think you are know the basics since you did this for the 3.0 release. > You need to create the 4.0.0 tag for all repos and then create the stx.4.0.0-default.xml (which I guess is what you use for jenkins). I am thinking you will also need to create stx.4.0.0-*.xml for the layered build. All the release specific xml files will need a line. > > There was some discussion about also tagging the ryu and > stx-openstack-ras repos, but I am not sure who owns those, for the > stx.4.0 branch, I added a git SHA. > > I might be up and around by Thursday, but with limited time. > > Sau! > > > > [0] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2007926 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From sgw at linux.intel.com Tue Aug 4 16:22:11 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 09:22:11 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release In-Reply-To: References: <8d028c1f-7a45-6baa-bf42-8991755aeac8@linux.intel.com> <70a2d697-60e0-7970-0ff4-10a441d4e93e@windriver.com> Message-ID: On 8/4/20 8:20 AM, Jones, Bruce E wrote: > The plea for docs is to review the R4 release notes. There is no need to delay tagging the docs. > I gave my comment, we can tag everything else and wait for this to merge before tagging the docs. Sau! > Please see: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742989 and https://review.opendev.org/#/c/744061 for the docs changes for the R4 release. Reviews and comments welcome! > > brucej > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Little > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 7:44 AM > To: Camp, MaryX ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Cc: Miller, Frank ; Panech, Davlet > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release > > We will be creating the 4.0.0 tag toady.  We won't forget docs. > > On another thread I saw a plea for more doc reviews.  Was there anything that requires us to delay tagging docs?  We could tag everything else and delay tagging docs for a day or two. > > Scott > > > On 2020-07-29 8:33 p.m., Camp, MaryX wrote: >> Hi Scott, >> For R4 we branched the starlingx/docs repo. This is a new process for starlingx/docs, so I'm sending a reminder to please be sure it is part of your tagging process. >> >> thanks, >> Mary Camp >> PTIGlobal Technical Writer | maryx.camp at intel.com >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Saul Wold >> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 11:31 AM >> To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Scott Little >> >> Cc: Miller, Frank ; Panech, Davlet >> >> Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release >> >> >> Scott, >> >> As you know I looked into both the root/build-tools/branching scripts and the tools/release scripts. I chose the tools/release scripts since they handled the branching better (it created the .gitreview). Both sets of scripts will probably work correctly for tagging, but neither handle the creation of the manifests correctly for the tag and now for layered build also, this would have to be done by hand initially. >> >> I do have a story[0] and folks assigned to fix the manifest issue, but that won't be fixed by next week. >> >> I think you are know the basics since you did this for the 3.0 release. >> You need to create the 4.0.0 tag for all repos and then create the stx.4.0.0-default.xml (which I guess is what you use for jenkins). I am thinking you will also need to create stx.4.0.0-*.xml for the layered build. All the release specific xml files will need a line. >> >> There was some discussion about also tagging the ryu and >> stx-openstack-ras repos, but I am not sure who owns those, for the >> stx.4.0 branch, I added a git SHA. >> >> I might be up and around by Thursday, but with limited time. >> >> Sau! >> >> >> >> [0] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2007926 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > From maryx.camp at intel.com Tue Aug 4 17:09:01 2020 From: maryx.camp at intel.com (Camp, MaryX) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 17:09:01 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release In-Reply-To: References: <8d028c1f-7a45-6baa-bf42-8991755aeac8@linux.intel.com> <70a2d697-60e0-7970-0ff4-10a441d4e93e@windriver.com> Message-ID: Echoing Bruce, please don't delay tagging the docs for the RN. Thanks for asking, Mary C. -----Original Message----- From: Saul Wold Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 12:22 PM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release On 8/4/20 8:20 AM, Jones, Bruce E wrote: > The plea for docs is to review the R4 release notes. There is no need to delay tagging the docs. > I gave my comment, we can tag everything else and wait for this to merge before tagging the docs. Sau! > Please see: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742989 and https://review.opendev.org/#/c/744061 for the docs changes for the R4 release. Reviews and comments welcome! > > brucej > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Little > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 7:44 AM > To: Camp, MaryX ; > starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Cc: Miller, Frank ; Panech, Davlet > > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release > > We will be creating the 4.0.0 tag toady.  We won't forget docs. > > On another thread I saw a plea for more doc reviews.  Was there anything that requires us to delay tagging docs?  We could tag everything else and delay tagging docs for a day or two. > > Scott > > > On 2020-07-29 8:33 p.m., Camp, MaryX wrote: >> Hi Scott, >> For R4 we branched the starlingx/docs repo. This is a new process for starlingx/docs, so I'm sending a reminder to please be sure it is part of your tagging process. >> >> thanks, >> Mary Camp >> PTIGlobal Technical Writer | maryx.camp at intel.com >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Saul Wold >> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 11:31 AM >> To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Scott Little >> >> Cc: Miller, Frank ; Panech, Davlet >> >> Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Tagging for stx.4.0 release >> >> >> Scott, >> >> As you know I looked into both the root/build-tools/branching scripts and the tools/release scripts. I chose the tools/release scripts since they handled the branching better (it created the .gitreview). Both sets of scripts will probably work correctly for tagging, but neither handle the creation of the manifests correctly for the tag and now for layered build also, this would have to be done by hand initially. >> >> I do have a story[0] and folks assigned to fix the manifest issue, but that won't be fixed by next week. >> >> I think you are know the basics since you did this for the 3.0 release. >> You need to create the 4.0.0 tag for all repos and then create the stx.4.0.0-default.xml (which I guess is what you use for jenkins). I am thinking you will also need to create stx.4.0.0-*.xml for the layered build. All the release specific xml files will need a line. >> >> There was some discussion about also tagging the ryu and >> stx-openstack-ras repos, but I am not sure who owns those, for the >> stx.4.0 branch, I added a git SHA. >> >> I might be up and around by Thursday, but with limited time. >> >> Sau! >> >> >> >> [0] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2007926 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 From sgw at linux.intel.com Tue Aug 4 17:54:12 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 10:54:12 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid Message-ID: Folks, I have completed the tagging of the 4.0.0 release in the r/stx.4.0 branch. We can start the release build now. I have not tagged the docs repo pending the final commits for 4.0 there. Sau! From sgw at linux.intel.com Tue Aug 4 21:43:14 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 14:43:14 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <058f9644-69e8-d977-e387-6b8ab2fb394e@linux.intel.com> Please hold off, looks like there was an issue with the configuration of the layered build when we started the RC builds. There are some changes that are needed to the stx-tools repo to address this. It's likely that we will now have to rev the 4.0.0 tag to something "next". This could be 4.0.1 or 4.0.0a, as the OpenStack Infra [0] manual does not allow for deleting and re-applying a tag. Please provide your feedback as to what the "next" tag should look like, my preference is we stay numerically sequencial and use 4.0.1. We are working to resolve this and create a proper 4.0 release once the updated tags are in place. Sau! [0] https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/drivers.html#tagging-a-release On 8/4/20 10:54 AM, Saul Wold wrote: > > Folks, > > I have completed the tagging of the 4.0.0 release in the r/stx.4.0 > branch.  We can start the release build now. > > I have not tagged the docs repo pending the final commits for 4.0 there. > > Sau! > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From bruce.e.jones at intel.com Tue Aug 4 21:53:17 2020 From: bruce.e.jones at intel.com (Jones, Bruce E) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 21:53:17 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid In-Reply-To: <058f9644-69e8-d977-e387-6b8ab2fb394e@linux.intel.com> References: <058f9644-69e8-d977-e387-6b8ab2fb394e@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: Thank you, Saul and Team. Suggest we use 4.0.1 for the tag. brucej -----Original Message----- From: Saul Wold Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 2:43 PM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid Please hold off, looks like there was an issue with the configuration of the layered build when we started the RC builds. There are some changes that are needed to the stx-tools repo to address this. It's likely that we will now have to rev the 4.0.0 tag to something "next". This could be 4.0.1 or 4.0.0a, as the OpenStack Infra [0] manual does not allow for deleting and re-applying a tag. Please provide your feedback as to what the "next" tag should look like, my preference is we stay numerically sequencial and use 4.0.1. We are working to resolve this and create a proper 4.0 release once the updated tags are in place. Sau! [0] https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/drivers.html#tagging-a-release On 8/4/20 10:54 AM, Saul Wold wrote: > > Folks, > > I have completed the tagging of the 4.0.0 release in the r/stx.4.0 > branch.  We can start the release build now. > > I have not tagged the docs repo pending the final commits for 4.0 there. > > Sau! > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From scott.little at windriver.com Tue Aug 4 22:30:38 2020 From: scott.little at windriver.com (Scott Little) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 18:30:38 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid In-Reply-To: References: <058f9644-69e8-d977-e387-6b8ab2fb394e@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <0429b408-a31b-6334-c351-36ac4d681fb6@windriver.com> So our plan is to make the config files changes, rebuild, retest and if green lighted, the tag will be 4.0.1 ? Scott On 2020-08-04 5:53 p.m., Jones, Bruce E wrote: > Thank you, Saul and Team. Suggest we use 4.0.1 for the tag. > > brucej > > -----Original Message----- > From: Saul Wold > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 2:43 PM > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid > > Please hold off, looks like there was an issue with the configuration of the layered build when we started the RC builds. There are some changes that are needed to the stx-tools repo to address this. > > It's likely that we will now have to rev the 4.0.0 tag to something "next". This could be 4.0.1 or 4.0.0a, as the OpenStack Infra [0] manual does not allow for deleting and re-applying a tag. > > Please provide your feedback as to what the "next" tag should look like, my preference is we stay numerically sequencial and use 4.0.1. > > We are working to resolve this and create a proper 4.0 release once the updated tags are in place. > > Sau! > > [0] > https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/drivers.html#tagging-a-release > > > > On 8/4/20 10:54 AM, Saul Wold wrote: >> Folks, >> >> I have completed the tagging of the 4.0.0 release in the r/stx.4.0 >> branch.  We can start the release build now. >> >> I have not tagged the docs repo pending the final commits for 4.0 there. >> >> Sau! >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 From sgw at linux.intel.com Tue Aug 4 23:10:06 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 16:10:06 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid In-Reply-To: <0429b408-a31b-6334-c351-36ac4d681fb6@windriver.com> References: <058f9644-69e8-d977-e387-6b8ab2fb394e@linux.intel.com> <0429b408-a31b-6334-c351-36ac4d681fb6@windriver.com> Message-ID: On 8/4/20 3:30 PM, Scott Little wrote: > So our plan is to make the config files changes, rebuild, retest and if > green lighted, the tag will be 4.0.1 ? > That sounds about right, I am still not sure what the correct config file changes are as if I understand it correctly there is a bit of a chicken/egg problem. The config file should point to release/4.0.1 but we dont have that yet, so I guess it points to rc/4.0 for the build, then gets updated to release/4.0.1 for the tag? If you make the config file changes, I will review them, as I asked in a previous thread, both the lst files and .repo files need to change, correct? Sau! > Scott > > > On 2020-08-04 5:53 p.m., Jones, Bruce E wrote: >> Thank you, Saul and Team.  Suggest we use 4.0.1 for the tag. >> >>         brucej >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Saul Wold >> Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 2:43 PM >> To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with >> 4.0.0 for Release buid >> >> Please hold off, looks like there was an issue with the configuration >> of the layered build when we started the RC builds.  There are some >> changes that are needed to the stx-tools repo to address this. >> >> It's likely that we will now have to rev the 4.0.0 tag to something >> "next".  This could be 4.0.1 or 4.0.0a, as the OpenStack Infra [0] >> manual does not allow for deleting and re-applying a tag. >> >> Please provide your feedback as to what the "next" tag should look >> like, my preference is we stay numerically sequencial and use 4.0.1. >> >> We are working to resolve this and create a proper 4.0 release once >> the updated tags are in place. >> >> Sau! >> >> [0] >> https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/drivers.html#tagging-a-release >> >> >> >> >> On 8/4/20 10:54 AM, Saul Wold wrote: >>> Folks, >>> >>> I have completed the tagging of the 4.0.0 release in the r/stx.4.0 >>> branch.  We can start the release build now. >>> >>> I have not tagged the docs repo pending the final commits for 4.0 there. >>> >>> Sau! >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 From scott.little at windriver.com Wed Aug 5 02:58:47 2020 From: scott.little at windriver.com (Scott Little) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 22:58:47 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid In-Reply-To: References: <058f9644-69e8-d977-e387-6b8ab2fb394e@linux.intel.com> <0429b408-a31b-6334-c351-36ac4d681fb6@windriver.com> Message-ID: <62c773a1-2bab-53e7-6aca-9c498829e3d0@windriver.com> Changes have merged and a rebuild of the 4.0 branch is underway on CENGN. Scott On 2020-08-04 7:10 p.m., Saul Wold wrote: > > > On 8/4/20 3:30 PM, Scott Little wrote: >> So our plan is to make the config files changes, rebuild, retest and >> if green lighted, the tag will be 4.0.1 ? >> > That sounds about right, I am still not sure what the correct config > file changes are as if I understand it correctly there is a bit of a > chicken/egg problem. > > The config file should point to release/4.0.1 but we dont have that > yet, so I guess it points to rc/4.0 for the build, then gets updated > to release/4.0.1 for the tag? > > If you make the config file changes, I will review them, as I asked in > a previous thread, both the lst files and .repo files need to change, > correct? > > Sau! > > > >> Scott >> >> >> On 2020-08-04 5:53 p.m., Jones, Bruce E wrote: >>> Thank you, Saul and Team.  Suggest we use 4.0.1 for the tag. >>> >>>         brucej >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Saul Wold >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 2:43 PM >>> To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged >>> with 4.0.0 for Release buid >>> >>> Please hold off, looks like there was an issue with the >>> configuration of the layered build when we started the RC builds.  >>> There are some changes that are needed to the stx-tools repo to >>> address this. >>> >>> It's likely that we will now have to rev the 4.0.0 tag to something >>> "next".  This could be 4.0.1 or 4.0.0a, as the OpenStack Infra [0] >>> manual does not allow for deleting and re-applying a tag. >>> >>> Please provide your feedback as to what the "next" tag should look >>> like, my preference is we stay numerically sequencial and use 4.0.1. >>> >>> We are working to resolve this and create a proper 4.0 release once >>> the updated tags are in place. >>> >>> Sau! >>> >>> [0] >>> https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/drivers.html#tagging-a-release >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 8/4/20 10:54 AM, Saul Wold wrote: >>>> Folks, >>>> >>>> I have completed the tagging of the 4.0.0 release in the r/stx.4.0 >>>> branch.  We can start the release build now. >>>> >>>> I have not tagged the docs repo pending the final commits for 4.0 >>>> there. >>>> >>>> Sau! >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 From sgw at linux.intel.com Wed Aug 5 04:46:06 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 21:46:06 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid In-Reply-To: <62c773a1-2bab-53e7-6aca-9c498829e3d0@windriver.com> References: <058f9644-69e8-d977-e387-6b8ab2fb394e@linux.intel.com> <0429b408-a31b-6334-c351-36ac4d681fb6@windriver.com> <62c773a1-2bab-53e7-6aca-9c498829e3d0@windriver.com> Message-ID: On 8/4/20 7:58 PM, Scott Little wrote: > Changes have merged and a rebuild of the 4.0 branch is underway on CENGN. > Thanks for that update. Nicolae, Can you please prioritize a Sanity test if of the 4.0.1 build that Scott fired this evening. Thanks Sau! > Scott > > > On 2020-08-04 7:10 p.m., Saul Wold wrote: >> >> >> On 8/4/20 3:30 PM, Scott Little wrote: >>> So our plan is to make the config files changes, rebuild, retest and >>> if green lighted, the tag will be 4.0.1 ? >>> >> That sounds about right, I am still not sure what the correct config >> file changes are as if I understand it correctly there is a bit of a >> chicken/egg problem. >> >> The config file should point to release/4.0.1 but we dont have that >> yet, so I guess it points to rc/4.0 for the build, then gets updated >> to release/4.0.1 for the tag? >> >> If you make the config file changes, I will review them, as I asked in >> a previous thread, both the lst files and .repo files need to change, >> correct? >> >> Sau! >> >> >> >>> Scott >>> >>> >>> On 2020-08-04 5:53 p.m., Jones, Bruce E wrote: >>>> Thank you, Saul and Team.  Suggest we use 4.0.1 for the tag. >>>> >>>>         brucej >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Saul Wold >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 2:43 PM >>>> To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >>>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged >>>> with 4.0.0 for Release buid >>>> >>>> Please hold off, looks like there was an issue with the >>>> configuration of the layered build when we started the RC builds. >>>> There are some changes that are needed to the stx-tools repo to >>>> address this. >>>> >>>> It's likely that we will now have to rev the 4.0.0 tag to something >>>> "next".  This could be 4.0.1 or 4.0.0a, as the OpenStack Infra [0] >>>> manual does not allow for deleting and re-applying a tag. >>>> >>>> Please provide your feedback as to what the "next" tag should look >>>> like, my preference is we stay numerically sequencial and use 4.0.1. >>>> >>>> We are working to resolve this and create a proper 4.0 release once >>>> the updated tags are in place. >>>> >>>> Sau! >>>> >>>> [0] >>>> https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/drivers.html#tagging-a-release >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 8/4/20 10:54 AM, Saul Wold wrote: >>>>> Folks, >>>>> >>>>> I have completed the tagging of the 4.0.0 release in the r/stx.4.0 >>>>> branch.  We can start the release build now. >>>>> >>>>> I have not tagged the docs repo pending the final commits for 4.0 >>>>> there. >>>>> >>>>> Sau! >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 From nicolae.jascanu at intel.com Wed Aug 5 09:16:07 2020 From: nicolae.jascanu at intel.com (Jascanu, Nicolae) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 09:16:07 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid In-Reply-To: References: <058f9644-69e8-d977-e387-6b8ab2fb394e@linux.intel.com> <0429b408-a31b-6334-c351-36ac4d681fb6@windriver.com> <62c773a1-2bab-53e7-6aca-9c498829e3d0@windriver.com> Message-ID: Hi Saul, Could you please indicate the location for 4.0.1 release? In the /release folder I have only 4.0.0: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/4.0.0/centos/flock/outputs/ Regards, Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. TSD Software Engineer Internet Of Things Group Galati, Romania -----Original Message----- From: Saul Wold Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 07:46 To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Jascanu, Nicolae Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid On 8/4/20 7:58 PM, Scott Little wrote: > Changes have merged and a rebuild of the 4.0 branch is underway on CENGN. > Thanks for that update. Nicolae, Can you please prioritize a Sanity test if of the 4.0.1 build that Scott fired this evening. Thanks Sau! > Scott > > > On 2020-08-04 7:10 p.m., Saul Wold wrote: >> >> >> On 8/4/20 3:30 PM, Scott Little wrote: >>> So our plan is to make the config files changes, rebuild, retest and >>> if green lighted, the tag will be 4.0.1 ? >>> >> That sounds about right, I am still not sure what the correct config >> file changes are as if I understand it correctly there is a bit of a >> chicken/egg problem. >> >> The config file should point to release/4.0.1 but we dont have that >> yet, so I guess it points to rc/4.0 for the build, then gets updated >> to release/4.0.1 for the tag? >> >> If you make the config file changes, I will review them, as I asked >> in a previous thread, both the lst files and .repo files need to >> change, correct? >> >> Sau! >> >> >> >>> Scott >>> >>> >>> On 2020-08-04 5:53 p.m., Jones, Bruce E wrote: >>>> Thank you, Saul and Team.  Suggest we use 4.0.1 for the tag. >>>> >>>>         brucej >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Saul Wold >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 2:43 PM >>>> To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >>>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged >>>> with 4.0.0 for Release buid >>>> >>>> Please hold off, looks like there was an issue with the >>>> configuration of the layered build when we started the RC builds. >>>> There are some changes that are needed to the stx-tools repo to >>>> address this. >>>> >>>> It's likely that we will now have to rev the 4.0.0 tag to something >>>> "next".  This could be 4.0.1 or 4.0.0a, as the OpenStack Infra [0] >>>> manual does not allow for deleting and re-applying a tag. >>>> >>>> Please provide your feedback as to what the "next" tag should look >>>> like, my preference is we stay numerically sequencial and use 4.0.1. >>>> >>>> We are working to resolve this and create a proper 4.0 release once >>>> the updated tags are in place. >>>> >>>> Sau! >>>> >>>> [0] >>>> https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/drivers.html#t >>>> agging-a-release >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 8/4/20 10:54 AM, Saul Wold wrote: >>>>> Folks, >>>>> >>>>> I have completed the tagging of the 4.0.0 release in the r/stx.4.0 >>>>> branch.  We can start the release build now. >>>>> >>>>> I have not tagged the docs repo pending the final commits for 4.0 >>>>> there. >>>>> >>>>> Sau! >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list >>>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >>>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discu >>>>> ss >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list >>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discus >>>> s _______________________________________________ >>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list >>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discus >>>> s >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 From haochuan.z.chen at intel.com Wed Aug 5 11:16:13 2020 From: haochuan.z.chen at intel.com (Chen, Haochuan Z) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 11:16:13 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] request patch review for bug fix Message-ID: Hi Please review my patch for bug fix. I already explain debug finding and fix solution in commit message. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/744486/ Thanks! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Wed Aug 5 12:16:51 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 12:16:51 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Community (& TSC) Call (August 5, 2020) Message-ID: Hi all, reminder of the TSC/Community call coming up later today. Please feel free to add items to the agenda [0] for the community call. Bill... [0] etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-status [1] call details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings#7am_PDT_.2F_1400_UTC_-_Community_Call [2] meeting start time in various time-zones: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20200805T1400 From austin.sun at intel.com Wed Aug 5 13:35:43 2020 From: austin.sun at intel.com (Sun, Austin) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 13:35:43 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] MoM: Weekly StarlingX non-OpenStack distro meeting, 8/5/2020 Message-ID: MoM for 8/5 meeting: - Ceph containerization: Document : https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+project:starlingx/docs+branch:master+topic:ceph-cluster-editorial Deploy document were updated for simplex and duplex. Patches Call for review: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:%22ceph+containerization%22 B&R: Neusoft found 1 issue. but it was baseline issue. will be finished Simplex B&R this week. Migration : Neusoft study the migration guide. - Centos8: The summary how many pkgs are not in currently ISO ---- neusoft team to provide https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1_TQwFsQSiVdsN5xWv4D3jajkmxWiJ3KV?usp=sharing (25/1587 is not provided ) ceph-fuse ceph-manager ceph-mds ceph-mgr ceph-mon ceph-osd ceph-radosgw docker-forward-journald OVMF pm-utils pth pygpgme pyliblzma python2-ipaddress python2-ironicclient python-backports python-backports-ssl_match_hostname python-ipaddr python-ipaddress rtctl sysvinit-tools tcp_wrappers-libs the opening patches (27 total ) https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:centos8+branch:f/centos8+status:open. - Open: - No Pending ticket for stx.4.0 correction release. Thanks. BR Austin Sun. From sgw at linux.intel.com Wed Aug 5 14:13:48 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 07:13:48 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid In-Reply-To: References: <058f9644-69e8-d977-e387-6b8ab2fb394e@linux.intel.com> <0429b408-a31b-6334-c351-36ac4d681fb6@windriver.com> <62c773a1-2bab-53e7-6aca-9c498829e3d0@windriver.com> Message-ID: <2987e946-567a-c57a-2a9e-796312220933@linux.intel.com> On 8/5/20 2:16 AM, Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > Hi Saul, > Could you please indicate the location for 4.0.1 release? > In the /release folder I have only 4.0.0: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/4.0.0/centos/flock/outputs/ > It appears I gave you the wrong location, the 4.0.1 release is still in the RC space: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/outputs/ Sorry for the confusion, there was alot of locations being tossed around yesterday. Sau! > Regards, > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > TSD Software Engineer > > > > Internet Of Things Group > Galati, Romania > > -----Original Message----- > From: Saul Wold > Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 07:46 > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Jascanu, Nicolae > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged with 4.0.0 for Release buid > > > > On 8/4/20 7:58 PM, Scott Little wrote: >> Changes have merged and a rebuild of the 4.0 branch is underway on CENGN. >> > Thanks for that update. > > Nicolae, Can you please prioritize a Sanity test if of the 4.0.1 build that Scott fired this evening. > > Thanks > Sau! > >> Scott >> >> >> On 2020-08-04 7:10 p.m., Saul Wold wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 8/4/20 3:30 PM, Scott Little wrote: >>>> So our plan is to make the config files changes, rebuild, retest and >>>> if green lighted, the tag will be 4.0.1 ? >>>> >>> That sounds about right, I am still not sure what the correct config >>> file changes are as if I understand it correctly there is a bit of a >>> chicken/egg problem. >>> >>> The config file should point to release/4.0.1 but we dont have that >>> yet, so I guess it points to rc/4.0 for the build, then gets updated >>> to release/4.0.1 for the tag? >>> >>> If you make the config file changes, I will review them, as I asked >>> in a previous thread, both the lst files and .repo files need to >>> change, correct? >>> >>> Sau! >>> >>> >>> >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2020-08-04 5:53 p.m., Jones, Bruce E wrote: >>>>> Thank you, Saul and Team.  Suggest we use 4.0.1 for the tag. >>>>> >>>>>         brucej >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Saul Wold >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 2:43 PM >>>>> To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >>>>> Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.0 Branch is tagged >>>>> with 4.0.0 for Release buid >>>>> >>>>> Please hold off, looks like there was an issue with the >>>>> configuration of the layered build when we started the RC builds. >>>>> There are some changes that are needed to the stx-tools repo to >>>>> address this. >>>>> >>>>> It's likely that we will now have to rev the 4.0.0 tag to something >>>>> "next".  This could be 4.0.1 or 4.0.0a, as the OpenStack Infra [0] >>>>> manual does not allow for deleting and re-applying a tag. >>>>> >>>>> Please provide your feedback as to what the "next" tag should look >>>>> like, my preference is we stay numerically sequencial and use 4.0.1. >>>>> >>>>> We are working to resolve this and create a proper 4.0 release once >>>>> the updated tags are in place. >>>>> >>>>> Sau! >>>>> >>>>> [0] >>>>> https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/drivers.html#t >>>>> agging-a-release >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 8/4/20 10:54 AM, Saul Wold wrote: >>>>>> Folks, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have completed the tagging of the 4.0.0 release in the r/stx.4.0 >>>>>> branch.  We can start the release build now. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have not tagged the docs repo pending the final commits for 4.0 >>>>>> there. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sau! >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list >>>>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >>>>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discu >>>>>> ss >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list >>>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >>>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discus >>>>> s _______________________________________________ >>>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list >>>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >>>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discus >>>>> s >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Wed Aug 5 14:16:03 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 14:16:03 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200805T013426Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-5 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200805T013426Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200805T013426Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Wed Aug 5 14:59:55 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 14:59:55 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Community (& TSC) Call (August 5, 2020) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >From today's meeting: * Standing Topics * Sanity * rc build is done, sanity will start soon - it'll be tagged 4.0.1 * Gerrit Reviews in Need of Attention * rook ceph: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:%22ceph+containerization%22 * release notes: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742989 * Topics for this Week * stx.4.0 - ready to declare once sanity is done & re-tagging is done & the files moved to final release folder * Saul will set https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1890350 to Fix Released before re-tagging * some gating bugs were recently fixed but didn't get fixed soon enough to be cherry-picked to stx.4.0 * Ghada will create a new tag to track those bugs, so it's query-able regardless of whether the bug is fixed or not * ARs from Previous Meetings * nothing new this week * Open Requests for Help * Sanity TC code or output * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009323.html * Nic will respond * bnx2x driver panic. Is source same as CentOS 7? * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009313.html * Saul will respond * Build Matters (if required) * nothing this week -----Original Message----- From: Zvonar, Bill Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 8:17 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Community (& TSC) Call (August 5, 2020) Hi all, reminder of the TSC/Community call coming up later today. Please feel free to add items to the agenda [0] for the community call. Bill... [0] etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-status [1] call details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings#7am_PDT_.2F_1400_UTC_-_Community_Call [2] meeting start time in various time-zones: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20200805T1400 From Andy.Ning at windriver.com Wed Aug 5 15:20:22 2020 From: Andy.Ning at windriver.com (Ning, Antai (Andy)) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 15:20:22 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 Message-ID: Hi All: Here is the doc info for: Support for ICA signed ssl, docker_registry certifcate installation: (https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1883300) The fix is delivered as: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740960/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740958/ With this bug fix released, ICA (intermediate CA) signed ssl, docker_registry certificate can be installed by the following command respectively: system certificate-install -m ssl system certificate-install -m docker_registry An ICA signed ssl, docker_registry certificate contains the final server certificate, and the intermediate CA certificates signing the final server certificate. In the pem file passed to system certificate install command, the certificates should be ordered such that each of the certificate is signed by the succeeding one, with the final server certificate as the very first in the list. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Wed Aug 5 15:24:34 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 15:24:34 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity RC 4.0 Test LAYERED build ISO 20200805T065839Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-5 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200805T065839Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200805T065839Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: From sgw at linux.intel.com Wed Aug 5 15:26:30 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 08:26:30 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] bnx2x driver panic. Is source same as CentOS 7? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2dc146c6-aac5-cd00-2b10-0984af564104@linux.intel.com> On 8/3/20 3:03 AM, Pratik M. wrote: > Hi, > I see a bnx2x driver panic during install of controller-1. Where do I > find the driver source for the same to confirm whether this is stock > from CentOS 7 or are there any changes? If it is the same as CentOS, > then I presume there is no point raising a bug in StarlingX LP? > Since you did not say if you are using the StarlingX 3.0 or master ISO, I wil try to answer for both! For 3.0, StarlingX uses the CentOS7 3.10 kernel with some additional patches and configuration changes. For 4.0 (soon to be released) and master, StarlingX uses the CentOS8 4.18 kernel with a smaller number of patches and configuration changes. Can you try installing from the master ISO to see if the 4.18 kernel addresses these panics? Does this only happen on the machine when installed via PXE? Does it happen if you install the ISO directly? This could be related to the initrd setup possibly then. > I have installed CentOS7 on the same hardware (albeit not via pxe from > the same broadcom "custer mgmt" NIC). > Just to confirm, you have installed a generic CentOS7 on this hardware and it works, but not via PXE boot, can you try to install the generic CentOS7 via PXE boot, this might rule out some of the StarlingX configuration changes. > I see a lot of these: bnx2x: [bnx2x_write_dmae:549(eno51)]DMAE > returned failure -1 > In what setup are you seeing these message? StarlingX and Generic CentOS7 or just StarlingX? > NIC is HP 536FLB which is QLogic 57840S > > Thanks in advance > Pratik > Thanks Sau! > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss > From maryx.camp at intel.com Wed Aug 5 21:04:11 2020 From: maryx.camp at intel.com (Camp, MaryX) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 21:04:11 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Andy, Thanks for letting us know about this doc change. It looks like this software bug fix requires an update to this user document: https://docs.starlingx.io/configuration/cert_config.html, in the Local Docker registry section. [source file = configuration/cert_config.rst] Can you please open a review against this guide in the docs repo and add the line "Related-Bug: 1883300" in your commit message? That will help us keep track of everything, since the original SW bug is already Fixed. Please let me know if you have any questions or issues. thanks again, Mary Camp PTIGlobal Technical Writer | maryx.camp at intel.com From: Ning, Antai (Andy) Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 11:20 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada ; Waines, Greg ; Balaraj, Juanita ; Camp, MaryX Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 Hi All: Here is the doc info for: Support for ICA signed ssl, docker_registry certifcate installation: (https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1883300) The fix is delivered as: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740960/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740958/ With this bug fix released, ICA (intermediate CA) signed ssl, docker_registry certificate can be installed by the following command respectively: system certificate-install -m ssl system certificate-install -m docker_registry An ICA signed ssl, docker_registry certificate contains the final server certificate, and the intermediate CA certificates signing the final server certificate. In the pem file passed to system certificate install command, the certificates should be ordered such that each of the certificate is signed by the succeeding one, with the final server certificate as the very first in the list. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From maryx.camp at intel.com Wed Aug 5 21:13:50 2020 From: maryx.camp at intel.com (Camp, MaryX) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 21:13:50 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [docs] [meeting] Docs team notes 2020-08-05 Message-ID: Hello all, Here are this week's docs team meeting minutes (short form). Details in [2]. Join us if you have interest in StarlingX docs! We meet on Wednesdays 12:30 PST.   [1]   Call logistics: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings   [2]   Tracking Etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-documentation thanks, Mary Camp ========== 2020-08-05 R4 Release Notes draft review: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742989/ Patch set 9 includes "not in R4" query, lists the known open LP, and includes Known limitation re Horizon (Yong's email) OPENS download path changes -- 4.0.1 http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/ Questions: wait and watch to see if 4.0.1 is actual or just the tagging IDs? Should we change all 4.0 text to 4.0.1 for consistency or add disclaimer/caveat text? We agreed on these ARs for Mary: uplevel the link to releases folder and then make new commit if needed after the release is posted. change heading from Bug fixes to Bug status to make more sense with the open bugs subsection. R4 install guides / landing page review: https://review.opendev.org/744061 OPENS similar to above wrt to download path changes and 4.0.1 vs 4.0 in text This is tagged as Depends-On to the RN review above. AR Mary: Uplevel the download path to remove the version # as described in RN. OK to merge this one to watch the "depends on" process. Ildikó shared this Zuul status URL: https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/status, also https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Status All -- Opens Ildikó brought up this message in the community email list: http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009345.html AR Mary reply to Andy and ask him to please make a review to the appropriate doc (add URL). We had a discussion about using "Partial-Bug: " in the commit message so that all the bugs would be linked together (software changes + doc updates). See guidelines for commit msgs here: https://docs.starlingx.io/developer_resources/code-submission-guide.html#link-reviews-to-story-or-bug From sgw at linux.intel.com Wed Aug 5 22:27:11 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 15:27:11 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.1 Update Status Message-ID: <01db5961-e015-318a-c29b-2925275fe98f@linux.intel.com> Folks, The 4.0.1 build completed and had a green sanity, we populated Cengn's release/4.0.1 [0] directory with the binary build. The ISO is located in the centos/flock/outputs/iso [1] directory. Currently, I am waiting for the manifest gerrit review [2] to merge before I can do the final 4.0.1 tagging of the source repos. Sau! [0] http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/4.0.1 [1] http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/4.0.1/centos/flock/outputs/iso [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/744923/ From sgw at linux.intel.com Thu Aug 6 00:43:26 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 17:43:26 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX 4.0.1 Release Status In-Reply-To: <01db5961-e015-318a-c29b-2925275fe98f@linux.intel.com> References: <01db5961-e015-318a-c29b-2925275fe98f@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: On 8/5/20 3:27 PM, Saul Wold wrote: > > Folks, > > The 4.0.1 build completed and had a green sanity, we populated Cengn's > release/4.0.1 [0] directory with the binary build. The ISO is located in > the centos/flock/outputs/iso [1] directory. > > Currently, I am waiting for the manifest gerrit review [2] to merge > before I can do the final 4.0.1 tagging of the source repos. > Manifest merged and 4.0.1 tags pushed to all source repos. Thanks to everyone for making this release happen, I know it did not quite go off as we all planned. Sau! > Sau! > > [0] http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/4.0.1 > [1] > http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/4.0.1/centos/flock/outputs/iso > > [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/744923/ From justin.fu at intel.com Thu Aug 6 02:55:46 2020 From: justin.fu at intel.com (Fu, Justin) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 02:55:46 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Build Packages Error Message-ID: Hi, I am working on building an ISO image according to this link(https://docs.starlingx.io/developer_resources/build_guide.html#build-the-centos-mirror-repository). However, when I execute build-pkgs to build the packages, the following error is shown. It seems that a lot of rpms under std/ directory are missing. 16:31:41 *** Build Failed *** 16:31:41 Tried 2 times - following pkgs could not be successfully built: 16:31:41 *** Build Failed *** 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/kernel-4.18.0-147.3.1.el8_1.7.tis.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/bash-4.2.46-31.el7.tis.4.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/setup-2.8.71-10.el7.tis.11.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/pxe-network-installer-1.0-28.tis.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/python-2.7.5-76.el7.tis.4.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/systemd-219-67.el7.tis.10.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/openldap-2.4.44-20.el7.tis.6.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mariadb-10.1.28-1.el7.tis.8.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/ceph-13.2.2-0.el7.tis.64.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mlnx-ofa_kernel-5.0-OFED.5.0.2.1.8.1.g5f67178.tis.1.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/qat17-4.5.0-00034.tis.12.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtce-1.0-154.tis.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/openssh-7.4p1-16.el7_4.tis.8.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/grub2-2.02-0.76.el7.centos.tis.7.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/libvirt-4.7.0-1.tis.27.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtce-common-1.0-130.tis.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtce-guest-1.0-142.tis.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/openvswitch-2.11.0-0.tis.12.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/net-tools-2.0-0.24.20131004git.el7.tis.5.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/net-snmp-5.7.2-37.el7.tis.7.src.rpm 16:31:41 /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/rabbitmq-server-3.6.5-1.el7.tis.7.src.rpm ... BR, Justin Fu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Akshay.346 at hsc.com Thu Aug 6 03:35:10 2020 From: Akshay.346 at hsc.com (Akshay 346) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 03:35:10 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] How to enable Manila on Stx-openstack. Message-ID: Hello Team, I hope you all are safe. Can you please suggest me how to enable Manila service on stx-openstack application. I have seen helm overrides but didn’t find anything specific to Manila. Please guide. Regards Akshay Get Outlook for iOS DISCLAIMER: This electronic message and all of its contents, contains information which is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or may have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete / destroy all copies of this electronic mail transmission without disclosing, copying, distributing, forwarding, printing or retaining any part of it. Hughes Systique accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Thu Aug 6 03:58:52 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 03:58:52 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity RC 4.0 Test LAYERED build ISO 20200805T122552Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-5 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200805T122552Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/rc/4.0/centos/flock/20200805T122552Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: From yong.hu at intel.com Thu Aug 6 09:32:26 2020 From: yong.hu at intel.com (Hu, Yong) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 09:32:26 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] How to enable Manila on Stx-openstack. Message-ID: Hi Akshay, StarlingX takes advantage of upstream openstack/openstack-helm, in which Manila is not a part. As well, in our current project scope, we haven’t received strong needs in Manila service. So, by default, we don’t have it in StarlingX. With regard to Manila service, could you introduce your usage case? Understanding your usage case might help us to give you some advice. Regards, Yong From: Akshay 346 Date: Thursday, August 6, 2020 at 11:44 AM To: "starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io" Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] How to enable Manila on Stx-openstack. Hello Team, I hope you all are safe. Can you please suggest me how to enable Manila service on stx-openstack application. I have seen helm overrides but didn’t find anything specific to Manila. Please guide. Regards Akshay Get Outlook for iOS DISCLAIMER: This electronic message and all of its contents, contains information which is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or may have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete / destroy all copies of this electronic mail transmission without disclosing, copying, distributing, forwarding, printing or retaining any part of it. Hughes Systique accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chen.dq at neusoft.com Thu Aug 6 09:31:36 2020 From: chen.dq at neusoft.com (cdq) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 17:31:36 +0800 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] OpenStack Backup and Restore Message-ID: <007801d66bd4$616731c0$24359540$@neusoft.com> Hi All: According to the documentation https://docs.starlingx.io/developer_resources/backup_restore.html When I deploy ISO, perform backup and restore operations. If w/o OpenStack, restore is successful. If we apply OpenStack, restore fails. Does the current version of Starlingx support OpenStack restore, or will Starlingx 4.0 support OpenStack restore? Thanks. BR Neusoft Corporation Neusoft Group (Dalian) Co., Ltd. No. 901 Huangpu Road, Dalian 116085, PRC Website: www.neusoft.com Mobile: (86) 13050529635 Tel:(86 0411) 8483 2794 E-mail: chen.dq at neusoft.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying attachment(s) is intended only for the use of the intended recipient and may be confidential and/or privileged of Neusoft Corporation, its subsidiaries and/or its affiliates. If any reader of this communication is not the intended recipient,unauthorized use,forwarding, printing, storing, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful.If you have received this communication in error,please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail, and delete the original message and all copies from your system. Thank you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nicolae.jascanu at intel.com Thu Aug 6 11:55:50 2020 From: nicolae.jascanu at intel.com (Jascanu, Nicolae) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 11:55:50 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Pratik, We are using for regular sanity the tests located at: https://opendev.org/starlingx/test/src/branch/master/automated-robot-suite/Tests Could you please tell what version you installed? The output of: cat /etc/build.info will be useful. Regards, Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. TSD Software Engineer Internet Of Things Group Galati, Romania -----Original Message----- From: Pratik M. Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 13:12 To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Hi, I am seeing stx-openstack apply failure w/ R3.0. I am following the steps from documentation. Seems others are seeing this too https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1889023 But the "Sanity OpenStack" TC must have passed, so I want to compare my steps with the ones there, to figure out if there is a difference. Can someone point me to either the code or the output of the test cases? Thanks Pratik _______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Thu Aug 6 12:33:17 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 12:33:17 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200806T013457Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-6 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200806T013457Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200806T013457Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: From Barton.Wensley at windriver.com Thu Aug 6 12:45:47 2020 From: Barton.Wensley at windriver.com (Wensley, Barton) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 12:45:47 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Propose new core for distcloud and distcloud-client repos Message-ID: I am proposing that we add Al Bailey as a core for the distcloud and distcloud-client repos. Al has done extensive development and reviews in these repos and we need his expertise as an additional core. I would ask the existing cores for these repos to indicate whether they agree. Thanks, Bart -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Barton.Wensley at windriver.com Thu Aug 6 13:20:10 2020 From: Barton.Wensley at windriver.com (Wensley, Barton) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 13:20:10 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Resending with only the mailing list in the "To" as it wouldn't go through otherwise. From: Wensley, Barton Sent: August 6, 2020 9:17 AM To: Lin, Shuicheng ; Hu, Yong ; Sun, Austin ; Liu, ZhipengS ; Church, Robert ; Friesen, Chris ; Kung, John ; Ning, Antai (Andy) ; Penney, Don ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada ; Miller, Frank ; Wold, Saul ; Rowsell, Brent Subject: RE: Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password Shuicheng, Your overall approach of creating a new stx-admin user to allow the platform to access the stx-openstack services sounds reasonable to me. I'd like some more details though - see my questions in your email below. Another question - how will the pod based openstack services handle the change to the admin password? That needs to be understood as well. Bart From: Lin, Shuicheng > Sent: August 5, 2020 8:24 PM To: Hu, Yong >; Sun, Austin >; Liu, ZhipengS >; Church, Robert >; Friesen, Chris >; Wensley, Barton >; Kung, John >; Ning, Antai (Andy) >; Penney, Don >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; Miller, Frank >; Wold, Saul >; Rowsell, Brent > Subject: RE: Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password + mail list. Best Regards Shuicheng From: Lin, Shuicheng Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 7:04 PM To: Hu, Yong >; Sun, Austin >; Liu, ZhipengS >; Church, Robert >; Friesen, Chris >; Wensley, Barton >; 'Kung, John' >; Ning, Antai (Andy) >; Penney, Don > Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; 'Miller, Frank' >; Wold, Saul >; Rowsell, Brent > Subject: Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password Hi all, Please help loop in any person who have interest for this issue. Here is the LP link: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1887755 The issue is that there are 2 admin account in STX. 1 for host keystone, 1 for openstack app's keystone. Both account's password could be changed independently. For this LP issue, it is openstack app's admin account password is changed, but host flock service doesn't know it, and try to access openstack app's keystone with the old password, and lead to account be locked by keystone. There are 2 problems here: 1. Host flock service doesn't know openstack app's admin password is changed. 2. Host flock service cannot get the new password. So, in order to solve the issue, I plan to create a new account like "stx_admin" in openstack app, which will be used by flock service to communicate with openstack app. For this "stx_admin" account, it will share the same password as host admin account. And password info will be synced with the host admin account. So the behavior will like below: 1. Admin account "stx_admin" will be created automatically when stx-openstack app is applied. [Bart] Will this be done through the helm charts in the stx-openstack application? I'd prefer not to use underscores in user names - I think stxadmin or stx-admin would be better. 1. "stx_admin" password info will be updated automatically when host admin account's password is changed. [Bart] What mechanism will be used to do this? 1. Host flock service like nfv_vim/pci-irq-affinity-agent will use "stx_admin" account to communicate with stx-openstack app. 2. "stx_admin" account and admin account in openstack app are independent of each other. Please share me your opinion of this solution, and whether there is any other better solution. I am going to implement it if there is no objection. Thanks. Best Regards Shuicheng -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From John.Kung at windriver.com Thu Aug 6 13:48:11 2020 From: John.Kung at windriver.com (Kung, John) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 13:48:11 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Subject: Propose new core for distcloud and distcloud-client repos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I agree with adding Al Bailey as core for the distcloud and distcloud-client repos John ________________________________ Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 12:45:47 +0000 From: "Wensley, Barton" To: "starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io" Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Propose new core for distcloud and distcloud-client repos Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" I am proposing that we add Al Bailey as a core for the distcloud and distcloud-client repos. Al has done extensive development and reviews in these repos and we need his expertise as an additional core. I would ask the existing cores for these repos to indicate whether they agree. Thanks, Bart -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sgw at linux.intel.com Thu Aug 6 15:04:16 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 08:04:16 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Multi-OS Team Notes 8/6/2020 Message-ID: <6e24efe4-ba23-0bc4-fea5-27d773bdf5dd@linux.intel.com> MultiOS Team Meeting - 8/6/2020 Notes: Current latest work is available at github.com/Wind-River/meta-stx on master branch Continuing to work on Hardware bring-up of OpenEmbedded Version Issues with systemd, which should be resolved Changes will be pushed by weeks end Provisioning and Unlocking should be functional on Simplex AIO Looking into issues with Ceph Next Steps: Duplex Sanity Testing Looking into using the existing Sanity Tests Might be problematic for initial setup and provisioning due to difference between CentOS and OE installation Could be used for just Sanity Part, but need to investigate setup Advised that project is moving to PyTest From Andy.Ning at windriver.com Thu Aug 6 15:19:53 2020 From: Andy.Ning at windriver.com (Ning, Antai (Andy)) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 15:19:53 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: Hi Mary, I updated configuration/cert_config.rst as you instructed in review: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/745168/ I don't know how to build it into html though. Thanks, Andy ________________________________ From: Camp, MaryX Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 5:04 PM To: Ning, Antai (Andy) ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada ; Waines, Greg ; Balaraj, Juanita Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 Hi Andy, Thanks for letting us know about this doc change. It looks like this software bug fix requires an update to this user document: https://docs.starlingx.io/configuration/cert_config.html, in the Local Docker registry section. [source file = configuration/cert_config.rst] Can you please open a review against this guide in the docs repo and add the line “Related-Bug: 1883300” in your commit message? That will help us keep track of everything, since the original SW bug is already Fixed. Please let me know if you have any questions or issues. thanks again, Mary Camp PTIGlobal Technical Writer | maryx.camp at intel.com From: Ning, Antai (Andy) Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 11:20 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada ; Waines, Greg ; Balaraj, Juanita ; Camp, MaryX Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 Hi All: Here is the doc info for: Support for ICA signed ssl, docker_registry certifcate installation: (https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1883300) The fix is delivered as: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740960/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740958/ With this bug fix released, ICA (intermediate CA) signed ssl, docker_registry certificate can be installed by the following command respectively: system certificate-install -m ssl system certificate-install -m docker_registry An ICA signed ssl, docker_registry certificate contains the final server certificate, and the intermediate CA certificates signing the final server certificate. In the pem file passed to system certificate install command, the certificates should be ordered such that each of the certificate is signed by the succeeding one, with the final server certificate as the very first in the list. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From maryx.camp at intel.com Thu Aug 6 15:41:02 2020 From: maryx.camp at intel.com (Camp, MaryX) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 15:41:02 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: Thanks Andy, you did it perfectly! We edit the .rst files and there is Zuul magic (scripts) that build the HTML output. FYI, you can view the draft HTML output from the review page - in the Zuul check section, click openstack-tox-docs, scroll down to Artifacts and click Docs preview site. Then you can drill down into the guide you updated. thanks again, Mary C. From: Ning, Antai (Andy) Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 11:20 AM To: Camp, MaryX ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada ; Waines, Greg ; Balaraj, Juanita Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 Hi Mary, I updated configuration/cert_config.rst as you instructed in review: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/745168/ I don't know how to build it into html though. Thanks, Andy ________________________________ From: Camp, MaryX > Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 5:04 PM To: Ning, Antai (Andy) >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; Waines, Greg >; Balaraj, Juanita > Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 Hi Andy, Thanks for letting us know about this doc change. It looks like this software bug fix requires an update to this user document: https://docs.starlingx.io/configuration/cert_config.html, in the Local Docker registry section. [source file = configuration/cert_config.rst] Can you please open a review against this guide in the docs repo and add the line "Related-Bug: 1883300" in your commit message? That will help us keep track of everything, since the original SW bug is already Fixed. Please let me know if you have any questions or issues. thanks again, Mary Camp PTIGlobal Technical Writer | maryx.camp at intel.com From: Ning, Antai (Andy) > Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 11:20 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; Waines, Greg >; Balaraj, Juanita >; Camp, MaryX > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 Hi All: Here is the doc info for: Support for ICA signed ssl, docker_registry certifcate installation: (https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1883300) The fix is delivered as: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740960/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740958/ With this bug fix released, ICA (intermediate CA) signed ssl, docker_registry certificate can be installed by the following command respectively: system certificate-install -m ssl system certificate-install -m docker_registry An ICA signed ssl, docker_registry certificate contains the final server certificate, and the intermediate CA certificates signing the final server certificate. In the pem file passed to system certificate install command, the certificates should be ordered such that each of the certificate is signed by the succeeding one, with the final server certificate as the very first in the list. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bruce.e.jones at intel.com Thu Aug 6 17:16:22 2020 From: bruce.e.jones at intel.com (Jones, Bruce E) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 17:16:22 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: To build out HTML copy of the docs, install tox on your system, and then just run it in the root of your docs tree. It will build out the entire docs collection on your system so you can view it in a browser. It will also call out any errors in your .rst file that will be caught by zuul. From: Camp, MaryX Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 8:41 AM To: Ning, Antai (Andy) ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada ; Waines, Greg ; Balaraj, Juanita Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 Thanks Andy, you did it perfectly! We edit the .rst files and there is Zuul magic (scripts) that build the HTML output. FYI, you can view the draft HTML output from the review page - in the Zuul check section, click openstack-tox-docs, scroll down to Artifacts and click Docs preview site. Then you can drill down into the guide you updated. thanks again, Mary C. From: Ning, Antai (Andy) > Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 11:20 AM To: Camp, MaryX >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; Waines, Greg >; Balaraj, Juanita > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 Hi Mary, I updated configuration/cert_config.rst as you instructed in review: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/745168/ I don't know how to build it into html though. Thanks, Andy ________________________________ From: Camp, MaryX > Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 5:04 PM To: Ning, Antai (Andy) >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; Waines, Greg >; Balaraj, Juanita > Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 Hi Andy, Thanks for letting us know about this doc change. It looks like this software bug fix requires an update to this user document: https://docs.starlingx.io/configuration/cert_config.html, in the Local Docker registry section. [source file = configuration/cert_config.rst] Can you please open a review against this guide in the docs repo and add the line "Related-Bug: 1883300" in your commit message? That will help us keep track of everything, since the original SW bug is already Fixed. Please let me know if you have any questions or issues. thanks again, Mary Camp PTIGlobal Technical Writer | maryx.camp at intel.com From: Ning, Antai (Andy) > Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 11:20 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; Waines, Greg >; Balaraj, Juanita >; Camp, MaryX > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx docs input: 1883300 Hi All: Here is the doc info for: Support for ICA signed ssl, docker_registry certifcate installation: (https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1883300) The fix is delivered as: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740960/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740958/ With this bug fix released, ICA (intermediate CA) signed ssl, docker_registry certificate can be installed by the following command respectively: system certificate-install -m ssl system certificate-install -m docker_registry An ICA signed ssl, docker_registry certificate contains the final server certificate, and the intermediate CA certificates signing the final server certificate. In the pem file passed to system certificate install command, the certificates should be ordered such that each of the certificate is signed by the succeeding one, with the final server certificate as the very first in the list. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com Thu Aug 6 18:39:17 2020 From: Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com (Khalil, Ghada) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 18:39:17 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx.4.0 Release milestone declared Message-ID: Hello all, This email announces that the stx.4.0 Release milestone has been achieved as of Aug 5, 2020. StarlingX release 4.0 is officially delivered! It is available on CENGN at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/4.0.1/ Release Notes at: https://docs.starlingx.io/releasenotes/r4_release.html This release delivers 13 new features and 314 bug fixes to StarlingX. See the release notes for a full list of features. Thank you to everyone in the Community - from development, test and documentation - for all of your hard work in delivering this release! Congratulations everyone! Regards, Ghada On behalf of the StarlingX Release team From chris.friesen at windriver.com Thu Aug 6 20:07:57 2020 From: chris.friesen at windriver.com (Chris Friesen) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 14:07:57 -0600 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Propose new core for distcloud and distcloud-client repos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5a7ef072-a95f-d656-9337-b69de78ea105@windriver.com> +1 from me. Chris On 8/6/2020 6:45 AM, Wensley, Barton wrote: > I am proposing that we add Al Bailey as a core for the distcloud and > distcloud-client repos. Al has done extensive development and reviews in > these repos and we need his expertise as an additional core. > > I would ask the existing cores for these repos to indicate whether they > agree. > > Thanks, > > Bart > > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss > From shuicheng.lin at intel.com Fri Aug 7 07:46:38 2020 From: shuicheng.lin at intel.com (Lin, Shuicheng) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 07:46:38 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Bart, Please see my reply inline. For the admin password info in pod secrets, I am not sure when and how it is used. Openstack services communicate with each other don't use admin auth. So no other issue is found yet after admin password change. I will do more test later. Best Regards Shuicheng From: Wensley, Barton Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 9:20 PM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password Resending with only the mailing list in the "To" as it wouldn't go through otherwise. From: Wensley, Barton Sent: August 6, 2020 9:17 AM To: Lin, Shuicheng >; Hu, Yong >; Sun, Austin >; Liu, ZhipengS >; Church, Robert >; Friesen, Chris >; Kung, John >; Ning, Antai (Andy) >; Penney, Don >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; Miller, Frank >; Wold, Saul >; Rowsell, Brent > Subject: RE: Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password Shuicheng, Your overall approach of creating a new stx-admin user to allow the platform to access the stx-openstack services sounds reasonable to me. I'd like some more details though - see my questions in your email below. Another question - how will the pod based openstack services handle the change to the admin password? That needs to be understood as well. Bart From: Lin, Shuicheng > Sent: August 5, 2020 8:24 PM To: Hu, Yong >; Sun, Austin >; Liu, ZhipengS >; Church, Robert >; Friesen, Chris >; Wensley, Barton >; Kung, John >; Ning, Antai (Andy) >; Penney, Don >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; Miller, Frank >; Wold, Saul >; Rowsell, Brent > Subject: RE: Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password + mail list. Best Regards Shuicheng From: Lin, Shuicheng Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 7:04 PM To: Hu, Yong >; Sun, Austin >; Liu, ZhipengS >; Church, Robert >; Friesen, Chris >; Wensley, Barton >; 'Kung, John' >; Ning, Antai (Andy) >; Penney, Don > Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; 'Miller, Frank' >; Wold, Saul >; Rowsell, Brent > Subject: Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password Hi all, Please help loop in any person who have interest for this issue. Here is the LP link: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1887755 The issue is that there are 2 admin account in STX. 1 for host keystone, 1 for openstack app's keystone. Both account's password could be changed independently. For this LP issue, it is openstack app's admin account password is changed, but host flock service doesn't know it, and try to access openstack app's keystone with the old password, and lead to account be locked by keystone. There are 2 problems here: 1. Host flock service doesn't know openstack app's admin password is changed. 2. Host flock service cannot get the new password. So, in order to solve the issue, I plan to create a new account like "stx_admin" in openstack app, which will be used by flock service to communicate with openstack app. For this "stx_admin" account, it will share the same password as host admin account. And password info will be synced with the host admin account. So the behavior will like below: 1. Admin account "stx_admin" will be created automatically when stx-openstack app is applied. [Bart] Will this be done through the helm charts in the stx-openstack application? I'd prefer not to use underscores in user names - I think stxadmin or stx-admin would be better. [Shuicheng] Let me try to create the account by helm charts. Otherwise, I need create it by openstack client cmd after application is applied. I will use stxadmin as the name. Thanks for the suggestion. 1. "stx_admin" password info will be updated automatically when host admin account's password is changed. [Bart] What mechanism will be used to do this? [Shuicheng] There is a keystone listener in sysinv which could receive notification when admin password is changed. So we could sync the new password to stxadmin account by sysinv. I need save stxadmin current password in keyring also, in order to communicate with keystone to update the new password. BTW, I am not sure whether this sync is must or not. There are 2 ways to handle the password of stxadmin. * Create stxadmin account with a random complex password, and leave it unchanged. * Use host admin password, and update it when host admin's password is changed. 1st method will make code simpler and easy to maintain. What is your suggestion for it? Thanks. 1. Host flock service like nfv_vim/pci-irq-affinity-agent will use "stx_admin" account to communicate with stx-openstack app. 2. "stx_admin" account and admin account in openstack app are independent of each other. Please share me your opinion of this solution, and whether there is any other better solution. I am going to implement it if there is no objection. Thanks. Best Regards Shuicheng -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pvmpublic at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 08:21:56 2020 From: pvmpublic at gmail.com (Pratik M.) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:51:56 +0530 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you. I am using R3.0 19.12 (pl. see below). This seems to be a known issue. http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-July/009270.html I guess the charts are OK, but the upstream docker images changed? So even though the tests passed when R3.0 was released, the openstack install will fail for everyone trying to use R3.0, now. [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ cat /etc/build.info ### ### StarlingX ### Release 19.12 ### OS="centos" SW_VERSION="19.12" BUILD_TARGET="Host Installer" BUILD_TYPE="Formal" BUILD_ID="r/stx.3.0" JOB="STX_BUILD_3.0" BUILD_BY="starlingx.build at cengn.ca" BUILD_NUMBER="21" BUILD_HOST="starlingx_mirror" BUILD_DATE="2019-12-13 02:30:00 +0000" Thanks Pratik On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > Hi Pratik, > We are using for regular sanity the tests located at: https://opendev.org/starlingx/test/src/branch/master/automated-robot-suite/Tests > > Could you please tell what version you installed? > The output of: cat /etc/build.info will be useful. > > Regards, > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > TSD Software Engineer > > > > Internet Of Things Group > Galati, Romania > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pratik M. > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 13:12 > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Hi, > I am seeing stx-openstack apply failure w/ R3.0. I am following the steps from documentation. Seems others are seeing this too > https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1889023 > > But the "Sanity OpenStack" TC must have passed, so I want to compare my steps with the ones there, to figure out if there is a difference. > Can someone point me to either the code or the output of the test cases? > > Thanks > Pratik > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Fri Aug 7 09:56:19 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 09:56:19 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200807T013420Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-7 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200807T013420Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200807T013420Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: From pvmpublic at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 10:16:00 2020 From: pvmpublic at gmail.com (Pratik M.) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 15:46:00 +0530 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] bnx2x driver panic. Is source same as CentOS 7? In-Reply-To: <2dc146c6-aac5-cd00-2b10-0984af564104@linux.intel.com> References: <2dc146c6-aac5-cd00-2b10-0984af564104@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 8:56 PM Saul Wold wrote: [...] > Since you did not say if you are using the StarlingX 3.0 or master ISO, > I wil try to answer for both! Thank you for the help. I was using R3.0. > Can you try installing from the master ISO to see if the 4.18 kernel > addresses these panics? Sure, I will try and update. > Does this only happen on the machine when installed via PXE? Does it > happen if you install the ISO directly? This could be related to the > initrd setup possibly then. I see this on C1 (controller-1) when it is booting from C0. If I try a direct iso install on the same server, as C0, I do not see it. Meanwhile, I found this: https://gist.github.com/michalskalski/c4bde2b14d1247daa1f8f8c333d00de3, where a BIOS workaround was suggested https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=emr_na-c04565693 When I applied that, the problem disappeared. And I was able to proceed w/ the install. Absurd thing is that I have installed CentOS 6/7 and Ubuntu on this host w/ intel_iommu=on. Maybe something to do w/ PXE boot or possibly their installer possibly not enabling intel_iommu=on. Confused. > Just to confirm, you have installed a generic CentOS7 on this hardware > and it works, but not via PXE boot, can you try to install the generic > CentOS7 via PXE boot, this might rule out some of the StarlingX > configuration changes. Difficult, since my PXE setup is on the network that I use for OAM, but for C1 needs to PXE boot from MGMT. I will try to see if I am able to tweak the C0 PXE settings to serve CentOS7. > > I see a lot of these: bnx2x: [bnx2x_write_dmae:549(eno51)]DMAE > > returned failure -1 > > > In what setup are you seeing these message? StarlingX and Generic > CentOS7 or just StarlingX? Only during the StarlingX C1 install, which then aborts. Hit this 3 times before the BIOS workaround. Thanks Pratik From austin.sun at intel.com Fri Aug 7 15:04:35 2020 From: austin.sun at intel.com (Sun, Austin) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 15:04:35 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Pratik: The R3.0 images should tag as rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest. Would you like check your env via this command grep 'registry\.local' /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/stx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml Thanks. BR Austin Sun. -----Original Message----- From: Pratik M. Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 4:22 PM To: Jascanu, Nicolae Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Thank you. I am using R3.0 19.12 (pl. see below). This seems to be a known issue. http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-July/009270.html I guess the charts are OK, but the upstream docker images changed? So even though the tests passed when R3.0 was released, the openstack install will fail for everyone trying to use R3.0, now. [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ cat /etc/build.info ### ### StarlingX ### Release 19.12 ### OS="centos" SW_VERSION="19.12" BUILD_TARGET="Host Installer" BUILD_TYPE="Formal" BUILD_ID="r/stx.3.0" JOB="STX_BUILD_3.0" BUILD_BY="starlingx.build at cengn.ca" BUILD_NUMBER="21" BUILD_HOST="starlingx_mirror" BUILD_DATE="2019-12-13 02:30:00 +0000" Thanks Pratik On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > Hi Pratik, > We are using for regular sanity the tests located at: > https://opendev.org/starlingx/test/src/branch/master/automated-robot-s > uite/Tests > > Could you please tell what version you installed? > The output of: cat /etc/build.info will be useful. > > Regards, > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > TSD Software Engineer > > > > Internet Of Things Group > Galati, Romania > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pratik M. > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 13:12 > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Hi, > I am seeing stx-openstack apply failure w/ R3.0. I am following the > steps from documentation. Seems others are seeing this too > https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1889023 > > But the "Sanity OpenStack" TC must have passed, so I want to compare my steps with the ones there, to figure out if there is a difference. > Can someone point me to either the code or the output of the test cases? > > Thanks > Pratik > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From Frank.Miller at windriver.com Fri Aug 7 17:15:35 2020 From: Frank.Miller at windriver.com (Miller, Frank) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 17:15:35 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] OpenStack Backup and Restore In-Reply-To: <007801d66bd4$616731c0$24359540$@neusoft.com> References: <007801d66bd4$616731c0$24359540$@neusoft.com> Message-ID: Chen: This is tracked by https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1890447 - there is a commit up for review. You may want to test that change to see if it addresses the issue you are seeing. Frank From: cdq Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2020 5:32 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: zhaos at neusoft.com; 'Sun, Austin' Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] OpenStack Backup and Restore Hi All: According to the documentation https://docs.starlingx.io/developer_resources/backup_restore.html When I deploy ISO, perform backup and restore operations. If w/o OpenStack, restore is successful. If we apply OpenStack, restore fails. Does the current version of Starlingx support OpenStack restore, or will Starlingx 4.0 support OpenStack restore? Thanks. BR Neusoft Corporation Neusoft Group (Dalian) Co., Ltd. No. 901 Huangpu Road, Dalian 116085, PRC Website: www.neusoft.com Mobile: (86) 13050529635 Tel:(86 0411) 8483 2794 E-mail: chen.dq at neusoft.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying attachment(s) is intended only for the use of the intended recipient and may be confidential and/or privileged of Neusoft Corporation, its subsidiaries and/or its affiliates. If any reader of this communication is not the intended recipient,unauthorized use,forwarding, printing, storing, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful.If you have received this communication in error,please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail, and delete the original message and all copies from your system. Thank you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sgw at linux.intel.com Fri Aug 7 17:48:31 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 10:48:31 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [Build] Removing Pike and Debranding CGCS Patches Message-ID: <3f57321e-ab48-c127-2387-46ee2df0deba@linux.intel.com> Scott, Davlet: Since we are early in 5.0, I would like to try again and get the pike diretory removed from the downloads and RPM repo names (this also affects docs). I have a proposed I have also in the past proposed that we remove the cgcs- prefix from the toplevel "root" repo name along with changing the the RPM repos from cgcs-centos-repo -> centos-repo tis-centos-repo -> local-repo The initial reviews are here [0], I know there is always more that can be done, this batch just addresses directory removal and/or renaming. I know that there are Jenkins and Cengn changes that are required for this to be completed successfully, we have tried to make these changes a couple of times in the past, but each time things got hung up for some reason or another. Please let me know if we can make it work this time. Thanks Sau! [0] https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:debrand_wip+(status:open) From nicolae.jascanu at intel.com Sat Aug 8 07:33:22 2020 From: nicolae.jascanu at intel.com (Jascanu, Nicolae) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2020 07:33:22 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Pratik, We installed the 3.0.0 image using the versioned helm-charts at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/3.0.0/centos/outputs/helm-charts/stx-openstack-1.0-19-centos-stable-versioned.tgz The sanity went well for simplex, duplex and standard external storage. Regards, Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. TSD Software Engineer Internet Of Things Group Galati, Romania -----Original Message----- From: Sun, Austin Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 18:05 To: Pratik M. ; Jascanu, Nicolae Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Hi Pratik: The R3.0 images should tag as rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest. Would you like check your env via this command grep 'registry\.local' /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/stx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml Thanks. BR Austin Sun. -----Original Message----- From: Pratik M. Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 4:22 PM To: Jascanu, Nicolae Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Thank you. I am using R3.0 19.12 (pl. see below). This seems to be a known issue. http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-July/009270.html I guess the charts are OK, but the upstream docker images changed? So even though the tests passed when R3.0 was released, the openstack install will fail for everyone trying to use R3.0, now. [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ cat /etc/build.info ### ### StarlingX ### Release 19.12 ### OS="centos" SW_VERSION="19.12" BUILD_TARGET="Host Installer" BUILD_TYPE="Formal" BUILD_ID="r/stx.3.0" JOB="STX_BUILD_3.0" BUILD_BY="starlingx.build at cengn.ca" BUILD_NUMBER="21" BUILD_HOST="starlingx_mirror" BUILD_DATE="2019-12-13 02:30:00 +0000" Thanks Pratik On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > Hi Pratik, > We are using for regular sanity the tests located at: > https://opendev.org/starlingx/test/src/branch/master/automated-robot-s > uite/Tests > > Could you please tell what version you installed? > The output of: cat /etc/build.info will be useful. > > Regards, > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > TSD Software Engineer > > > > Internet Of Things Group > Galati, Romania > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pratik M. > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 13:12 > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Hi, > I am seeing stx-openstack apply failure w/ R3.0. I am following the > steps from documentation. Seems others are seeing this too > https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1889023 > > But the "Sanity OpenStack" TC must have passed, so I want to compare my steps with the ones there, to figure out if there is a difference. > Can someone point me to either the code or the output of the test cases? > > Thanks > Pratik > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Sat Aug 8 11:21:42 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2020 11:21:42 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200808T013416Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-8 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200808T013416Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200808T013416Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: From Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com Sat Aug 8 18:02:18 2020 From: Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com (Khalil, Ghada) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2020 18:02:18 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Minutes: StarlingX Release Meeting - Aug 6/2020 Message-ID: Agenda/Minutes are posted at: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-releases stx.4.0 - We are done as of August 5 2020! Congratulations everyone! - Will send a quick email to the mailing list today. - Blog posts and marketing announcements will come out on Monday August 10 stx.3.0.1 - Want to get started on this next week - Davlet had an RC build done two weeks ago - One fix just merged recently on Aug 3. - Ghada to check if anything else needs to be cherrypicked, then request Davlet to start another build - Nick and team will use that load for sanity and some regression stx.5.0 - Planning to start shortly From haochuan.z.chen at intel.com Mon Aug 10 02:52:45 2020 From: haochuan.z.chen at intel.com (Chen, Haochuan Z) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 02:52:45 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Please review my patch for add rook-ceph project in manifest In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi folks Please review my patch to add rook-ceph in manifest project. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/728364/ BR! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From haochuan.z.chen at intel.com Mon Aug 10 02:53:45 2020 From: haochuan.z.chen at intel.com (Chen, Haochuan Z) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 02:53:45 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] review patch for enable rook-ceph in openstack-armada-app project Message-ID: Hi folks Please review my patch to enable rook-ceph in openstack-armada-app project. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/731872/ BR! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From haochuan.z.chen at intel.com Mon Aug 10 03:08:41 2020 From: haochuan.z.chen at intel.com (Chen, Haochuan Z) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 03:08:41 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] review patch to enable rook-ceph in metal project Message-ID: Hi folks Please review my patch to enable rook-ceph in metal project. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737228/ BR! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Venkata.Veldanda at radisys.com Mon Aug 10 03:32:18 2020 From: Venkata.Veldanda at radisys.com (Venkata Ramana Veldanda) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 03:32:18 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] userspace-cni-network-plugin support in starlingx? Message-ID: Hi, Does Starlingx 3.0 or 4.0 support userspace-cni-network-plugin ? https://github.com/intel/userspace-cni-network-plugin Venkata Veldanda Technical Specialist, Engineering - Mobility Engine Radisys Phone: +91-9916594646 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pvmpublic at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 08:40:19 2020 From: pvmpublic at gmail.com (Pratik M.) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 14:10:19 +0530 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, Thank you for the help. I used stable-latest based on the documentation here: https://docs.starlingx.io/deploy_install_guides/r3_release/openstack/install.html#install-application-manifest-and-helm-charts I will try w/ stable-versioned and let you know. Should I open a documentation bug? I am not sure I still understand the reason why R3.0 OpenStack install worked earlier, but fails now. Can the tags move after a release? So the stable-latest OpenStack is from upstream's perspective (so no StarlingX sanity check)? Just trying to understand. [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ grep 'registry\.local' /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/stx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml | grep neutron neutron_bagpipe_bgp: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_db_sync: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_dhcp: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_l2gw: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_l3: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_linuxbridge_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_metadata: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_openvswitch_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_server: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_sriov_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_sriov_agent_init: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest Thanks in advance Pratik On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 1:03 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > Hi Pratik, > We installed the 3.0.0 image using the versioned helm-charts at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/3.0.0/centos/outputs/helm-charts/stx-openstack-1.0-19-centos-stable-versioned.tgz > > The sanity went well for simplex, duplex and standard external storage. > > Regards, > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > TSD Software Engineer > > > > Internet Of Things Group > Galati, Romania > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sun, Austin > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 18:05 > To: Pratik M. ; Jascanu, Nicolae > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Hi Pratik: > The R3.0 images should tag as rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest. Would you like check your env via this command > > grep 'registry\.local' /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/stx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml > > Thanks. > BR > Austin Sun. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pratik M. > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 4:22 PM > To: Jascanu, Nicolae > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Thank you. I am using R3.0 19.12 (pl. see below). This seems to be a known issue. > http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-July/009270.html > > I guess the charts are OK, but the upstream docker images changed? So even though the tests passed when R3.0 was released, the openstack install will fail for everyone trying to use R3.0, now. > > [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ cat /etc/build.info ### ### StarlingX > ### Release 19.12 > ### > > OS="centos" > SW_VERSION="19.12" > BUILD_TARGET="Host Installer" > BUILD_TYPE="Formal" > BUILD_ID="r/stx.3.0" > > JOB="STX_BUILD_3.0" > BUILD_BY="starlingx.build at cengn.ca" > BUILD_NUMBER="21" > BUILD_HOST="starlingx_mirror" > BUILD_DATE="2019-12-13 02:30:00 +0000" > > Thanks > Pratik > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > > > Hi Pratik, > > We are using for regular sanity the tests located at: > > https://opendev.org/starlingx/test/src/branch/master/automated-robot-s > > uite/Tests > > > > Could you please tell what version you installed? > > The output of: cat /etc/build.info will be useful. > > > > Regards, > > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > > TSD Software Engineer > > > > > > > > Internet Of Things Group > > Galati, Romania > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Pratik M. > > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 13:12 > > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > > > Hi, > > I am seeing stx-openstack apply failure w/ R3.0. I am following the > > steps from documentation. Seems others are seeing this too > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1889023 > > > > But the "Sanity OpenStack" TC must have passed, so I want to compare my steps with the ones there, to figure out if there is a difference. > > Can someone point me to either the code or the output of the test cases? > > > > Thanks > > Pratik > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 From haochuan.z.chen at intel.com Mon Aug 10 03:00:03 2020 From: haochuan.z.chen at intel.com (Chen, Haochuan Z) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 03:00:03 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] review my patch to enable rook-ceph in ansible-playbooks project Message-ID: Hi folks Please review my patch to enable rook-ceph in ansible-playbooks project. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/734065/ BR! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From haochuan.z.chen at intel.com Mon Aug 10 03:21:37 2020 From: haochuan.z.chen at intel.com (Chen, Haochuan Z) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 03:21:37 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] review patch to enable rook-ceph in stx-puppet project Message-ID: Hi folks Please review my patch to enable rook-ceph in stx-puppet project. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/735501/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/739363/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/721765/ BR! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From haochuan.z.chen at intel.com Mon Aug 10 03:24:57 2020 From: haochuan.z.chen at intel.com (Chen, Haochuan Z) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 03:24:57 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] review patch to enable rook-ceph in config project. Message-ID: Hi folks Please review my patch to enable rook-ceph in config project. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/726281/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/739362/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/713084/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/720637/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/738555/ BR! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Barton.Wensley at windriver.com Mon Aug 10 13:03:16 2020 From: Barton.Wensley at windriver.com (Wensley, Barton) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 13:03:16 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Propose new core for distcloud and distcloud-client repos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Since the majority of the cores approved (and none objected), Al is now a core for distcloud and distcloud-client. Bart From: Wensley, Barton Sent: August 6, 2020 8:46 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Propose new core for distcloud and distcloud-client repos I am proposing that we add Al Bailey as a core for the distcloud and distcloud-client repos. Al has done extensive development and reviews in these repos and we need his expertise as an additional core. I would ask the existing cores for these repos to indicate whether they agree. Thanks, Bart -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 14:22:25 2020 From: ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com (Ildiko Vancsa) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 16:22:25 +0200 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx.4.0 Release milestone declared In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <03915CCD-294E-48CB-9FF4-A67EDAA493F5@gmail.com> Hi, Great news! I would like to congratulate to the community and also say thank you to all the contributors who participated in the release in any shape of form! You can also find the press release here: https://www.prweb.com/releases/starlingx_open_source_community_delivers_4_0_release_enhancing_platform_security_by_furthering_integrations_with_kata_containers_kubernetes/prweb17312195.htm And the blog post about the release here: https://www.starlingx.io/blog/starlingx-release-4/ Best Regards, Ildikó > On Aug 6, 2020, at 20:39, Khalil, Ghada wrote: > > Hello all, > This email announces that the stx.4.0 Release milestone has been achieved as of Aug 5, 2020. StarlingX release 4.0 is officially delivered! > > It is available on CENGN at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/4.0.1/ > Release Notes at: https://docs.starlingx.io/releasenotes/r4_release.html > > This release delivers 13 new features and 314 bug fixes to StarlingX. See the release notes for a full list of features. > > Thank you to everyone in the Community - from development, test and documentation - for all of your hard work in delivering this release! > Congratulations everyone! > > Regards, > Ghada > On behalf of the StarlingX Release team > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From sgw at linux.intel.com Mon Aug 10 19:12:25 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:12:25 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [Build] Trying to outline RC and Release Builds - Please review Message-ID: <19a9d1c7-4de9-e0e0-a5ed-6aaa777944ab@linux.intel.com> Build Team and any interested parties: Please review this outline of the RC and Release build preparations. After the latest release, I wanted to make sure that we document what needs to be done and update the tools we have to make this process as automated as possible. This is very rough, I probably forgot a step or 5! I do not include any Jenkins/Cengn related steps since I was not involved in those. I hope that we can also discuss in tomorrow's Build team meeting, but let's get comments here on the email list. Thanks Sau! For the Initial Release Candiate Branch Creation: 1) Branch for Release Candidate (RC) only, no tagging initially. This includes adjusting the .gitreview files (this is currently handled by the stx-tools/release scripts. 2) Update Manifest repo (both default and layered xml files) to point to newly created RC branch via default revision branch name (not a tag) 3) Build RC branch, continues to use master for Layer configuration - This generates all the initial artifacts that can then be used for future rc builds. 4) Wait for Sanity test results 5) Use generated CONTEXT.sh file to update the manifests (as above) to point to all the correct and "static" git repo HEADS. 6) Update the tools/centos-mirror-tools/config/centos layer configuration and repo files to point to the newly created RC location on cengn. 7) Tag all repos with RC tag, we need to clarify format of this tag we are using vX.Y.Z.rc0 vs Release tag X.Y.Z no "v" prefix, I think we need to be more consistent here. (all repos includes manifest) RC builds should now be using RC artifacts Final Build / Tagging for Release Builds: 1) Build from RC branch using RC Artifact (probably need sanity test results) 2) artifacts are copied to release/ are when approved 3) Update manifest repo with default revision pointing to the release tag (not the branch name), update any static git reference is needed. 4) Update the stx-tools layer configuration and repo files to point to the release//... artifacts 5) Tag source repos with release version tag 6) A final rebuild should be done to verify artifacts From kennelson11 at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 19:14:15 2020 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:14:15 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Virtual PTG October 2020 Dates & Registration Message-ID: Hello Everyone! I'm sure you all have been anxiously awaiting the announcement of the dates for the next virtual PTG! After polling the community[1] and balancing the pros and cons, we have decided the PTG will take place the week after the Open Infrastructure Summit[2][3] from October 26th to October 30th, 2020. PTG registration is now open[4]. Like last time, it is free, but we will again be using it to communicate details about the event (schedules, passwords, etc), so please register! Later this week we will send out info about signing up teams. Also, the same as last time, we will have an ethercalc signup and a survey to gather some other data about your team. -the Kendalls (diablo_rojo & wendallkaters) [1] ML Poll for PTG Dates: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-July/016098.html [2] Summit Site: https://www.openstack.org/summit/2020/ [3] Summit Registration: https://openinfrasummit2020.eventbrite.com [4] PTG Registration: https://october2020ptg.eventbrite.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Tue Aug 11 08:37:54 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 08:37:54 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200810T230412Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-10 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200810T230412Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200810T230412Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From yong.hu at intel.com Tue Aug 11 12:40:13 2020 From: yong.hu at intel.com (Hu, Yong) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 12:40:13 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] How to enable Manila on Stx-openstack. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3C6F6DFF-9938-4711-81AE-9428BAA09603@intel.com> Hi Akshay, Normally we use Cinder to provide volumes for VMs and on the backend Ceph provides PV for Cinder. Regards, Yong From: Akshay 346 Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 8:29 PM To: "Hu, Yong" , "starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io" Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] How to enable Manila on Stx-openstack. Hi Yong, Our use case: We want OpenStack VMs on StarlingX to have access to shared storage provided by Ceph cluster (managed by StarlingX). Please see if you can guide me. Regards, Akshay From: Hu, Yong Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 2:32 AM To: Akshay 346 ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] How to enable Manila on Stx-openstack. CAUTION:This email originated from an external organization Hi Akshay, StarlingX takes advantage of upstream openstack/openstack-helm, in which Manila is not a part. As well, in our current project scope, we haven’t received strong needs in Manila service. So, by default, we don’t have it in StarlingX. With regard to Manila service, could you introduce your usage case? Understanding your usage case might help us to give you some advice. Regards, Yong From: Akshay 346 > Date: Thursday, August 6, 2020 at 11:44 AM To: "starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io" > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] How to enable Manila on Stx-openstack. Hello Team, I hope you all are safe. Can you please suggest me how to enable Manila service on stx-openstack application. I have seen helm overrides but didn’t find anything specific to Manila. Please guide. Regards Akshay Get Outlook for iOS DISCLAIMER: This electronic message and all of its contents, contains information which is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or may have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete / destroy all copies of this electronic mail transmission without disclosing, copying, distributing, forwarding, printing or retaining any part of it. Hughes Systique accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus. DISCLAIMER: This electronic message and all of its contents, contains information which is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or may have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete / destroy all copies of this electronic mail transmission without disclosing, copying, distributing, forwarding, printing or retaining any part of it. Hughes Systique accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Akshay.346 at hsc.com Tue Aug 11 12:29:06 2020 From: Akshay.346 at hsc.com (Akshay 346) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 12:29:06 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] How to enable Manila on Stx-openstack. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Yong, Our use case: We want OpenStack VMs on StarlingX to have access to shared storage provided by Ceph cluster (managed by StarlingX). Please see if you can guide me. Regards, Akshay From: Hu, Yong Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 2:32 AM To: Akshay 346 ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] How to enable Manila on Stx-openstack. CAUTION:This email originated from an external organization Hi Akshay, StarlingX takes advantage of upstream openstack/openstack-helm, in which Manila is not a part. As well, in our current project scope, we haven’t received strong needs in Manila service. So, by default, we don’t have it in StarlingX. With regard to Manila service, could you introduce your usage case? Understanding your usage case might help us to give you some advice. Regards, Yong From: Akshay 346 > Date: Thursday, August 6, 2020 at 11:44 AM To: "starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io" > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] How to enable Manila on Stx-openstack. Hello Team, I hope you all are safe. Can you please suggest me how to enable Manila service on stx-openstack application. I have seen helm overrides but didn’t find anything specific to Manila. Please guide. Regards Akshay Get Outlook for iOS DISCLAIMER: This electronic message and all of its contents, contains information which is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or may have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete / destroy all copies of this electronic mail transmission without disclosing, copying, distributing, forwarding, printing or retaining any part of it. Hughes Systique accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus. DISCLAIMER: This electronic message and all of its contents, contains information which is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or may have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete / destroy all copies of this electronic mail transmission without disclosing, copying, distributing, forwarding, printing or retaining any part of it. Hughes Systique accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yong.hu at intel.com Tue Aug 11 13:17:52 2020 From: yong.hu at intel.com (Hu, Yong) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 13:17:52 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX Distro-OpenStack: Bi-weekly Project Meeting Message-ID: We were having a short but sweet meeting today, please check out the notes 08/11/2020 Meeting - We got stx.4.0 release (with tag 4.0.1) on Aug 7th. THANK YOU ALL for your contributions!! - for stx.4.x maintenance release, we are having 3 LPs to be resolved. Look into the details: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1890447 - HIGH #1890447 B&R with stx-openstack: Unlock failed after restore playbook was run --> patch under review https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1881915 - Medium #1881915 VM resize failed by "No valid host was found" --> no solution yet. https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1888546 - Medium #1888546 MTC openstack command failed when standby controller is down --> patch under review - for stx.5.0 release, CALL FOR ACTION, we need a developer to take OpenStack upgrade from "Ussuri" to "V", before we can commit this for stx.5.0 planning. Regards, Yong From: yong.hu at intel.com When: 9:00 PM - 9:30 PM August 11, 2020 Subject: StarlingX Distro-OpenStack: Bi-weekly Project Meeting Location: https://zoom.us/j/342730236 Hi folks, This is a new series of bi-weekly project meeting on StarlingX Distro-OpenStack. Your participation to this meeting and/or other offline contribution by all means are highly appreciated! Join the meeting: https://zoom.us/j/342730236 Project Team Etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-distro-openstack-meetings PS: from now to next summer early, we are going to keep this time slot to accommodate US standard time (6:00 AM in the morning). regards, Yong Hu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Akshay.346 at hsc.com Tue Aug 11 13:27:52 2020 From: Akshay.346 at hsc.com (Akshay 346) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 13:27:52 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] How to enable Manila on Stx-openstack. In-Reply-To: <3C6F6DFF-9938-4711-81AE-9428BAA09603@intel.com> References: , <3C6F6DFF-9938-4711-81AE-9428BAA09603@intel.com> Message-ID: Hi Yong, We are looking for shared FILE storage so that we can mount it on openstack VMs and then all VMs can access shared ceph file system. Cinder does not provide that. Regards Akshay Get Outlook for iOS DISCLAIMER: This electronic message and all of its contents, contains information which is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or may have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete / destroy all copies of this electronic mail transmission without disclosing, copying, distributing, forwarding, printing or retaining any part of it. Hughes Systique accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yang.liu at windriver.com Tue Aug 11 15:30:06 2020 From: yang.liu at windriver.com (Liu, Yang (YOW)) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 15:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Canceled: Weekly StarlingX Test meeting Message-ID: Weekly meeting on Tuesday 8AM PT / 1500 UTC Zoom Link: https://zoom.us/j/342730236 Meeting agenda/minutes: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-test -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/calendar Size: 5562 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sgw at linux.intel.com Tue Aug 11 21:14:10 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 14:14:10 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Fwd: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2ffd7054-4038-2d1c-8d82-e57dfa5f97a4@linux.intel.com> + Discuss list, please reply to this thread. Thanks Sau! -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 20:47:44 +0000 From: Smith, Tyler To: Kumar, Sharath , Bhat, Gopalkrishna , Das, Ambarish , Penney, Don , Mukherjee, Sanjay K CC: Wold, Saul , Jones, Bruce E , Sun, Austin , Eslimi, Dariush , Wold, Saul Thanks Sarath, Ok I misunderstood the question, to build the flock layer you can use “build-pkgs starlingx-dashboard” to build our existing plugin.  “build-pkgs python-django-horizon” will build horizon, but there shouldn’t need to be any modifications to that. During development I tend to just copy over any altered files and restart horizon via “sm-restart service horizon”, or using the dev server as you mentioned should be fine too.  As for your question from IRC, the credentials to the dev server would be whatever is setup in keystone.  Are you running the dev server on the controller? if not then you'll  need to make sure your local_settings file is pointing to the controller via the openstack_host settings and others as documented here: https://docs.openstack.org/horizon/latest/contributor/quickstart.html Tyler *From:* Kumar, Sharath [mailto:sharath.kumar at intel.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, August 11, 2020 10:47 AM *To:* Bhat, Gopalkrishna ; Smith, Tyler ; Das, Ambarish ; Penney, Don ; Mukherjee, Sanjay K *Cc:* Wold, Saul ; Jones, Bruce E ; Sun, Austin ; Eslimi, Dariush ; Wold, Saul *Subject:* RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hi Tyler, Thank you for your time to let us present and review our approach document in the flock meeting. As discussed , attaching the approach document we presented today. To start with our approach, we need help on how to build GUI package only in the flock layer. As an example, we can build fault using  “build-pkg fault” command. Other queries are highlighted in the approach document. Please let us know if you need any clarifications. Regards, Sharath *From:* Bhat, Gopalkrishna > *Sent:* Monday, August 10, 2020 10:15 PM *To:* Smith, Tyler >; Das, Ambarish >; Penney, Don >; Mukherjee, Sanjay K > *Cc:* Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Sun, Austin >; Eslimi, Dariush >; Kumar, Sharath >; Wold, Saul > *Subject:* RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hello Tyler , Would like to give heads-up that Sanjay & Sharath wanted to present the updates on the 2^nd approach mentioned in the below email in tomorrow’s community meeting .Hope you could be part of the meeting so that we can align on the next steps */[Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX Config/DC/Flock/Upgrade Bi-weekly            Meeting 6:30am UST/7pm BLR /* Regards Gopi *From:* Smith, Tyler > *Sent:* Friday, May 15, 2020 1:35 AM *To:* Das, Ambarish >; Penney, Don >; Mukherjee, Sanjay K > *Cc:* Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Bhat, Gopalkrishna >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io ; Sun, Austin >; Eslimi, Dariush > *Subject:* RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hi Ambarish & Sanjay There were two approaches that were being looked at.  The first was to use the same GUI plugin for both the platform horizon and containerized horizon, but only copy over the horizon 'enabled' files corresponding to the panels that we want to enable (fault panels in the containerized case).  This is the approach that was tried but it ended up not working and required lots of hacks during the docker image build step, such as modifying the code, which we really want to avoid.  The reasons it wasn't working weren't really clear to me, I didn't spend time debugging etc. Attached is some background on what was being discussed then. The decision was made to instead split our plugin into two, one for the platform panels, and one for just the fault panels.  This will involve creating a new package next to starlingx-dashboard (in the same repo though) that has a similar structure but only has the relevant fault components.  Including: Api/fm.py Api/rest/fm.py Dashboards/admin/active_alarms/ Static/dashboard/fault_management/ Enabled/   -> need the fm related enabled files in here, along with the banner view header section definition (see ADD_HEADER_SECTIONS).  These files will get copied over in the docker image build step.  The only other instruction in this step should be the csrftoken customization command from the attached email, which I think unfortunately is required. As for the settings for the containerized horizon, they are stored in the openstack helm application manifest here: openstack-armada-app/stx-openstack-helm/stx-openstack-helm/manifests/manifest.yaml My understanding is fault management will remain in the platform as well.  A distributed cloud deployment will also have to be tested, as the dc_admin dashboard also queries fm. There's decent documentation on the plugin structure upstream: https://docs.openstack.org/horizon/latest/contributor/tutorials/plugin.html Let me know if you need more details Tyler *From:* Das, Ambarish [mailto:ambarish.das at intel.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, May 13, 2020 2:22 AM *To:* Penney, Don >; Smith, Tyler > *Cc:* Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Bhat, Gopalkrishna >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io ; Mukherjee, Sanjay K >; Sun, Austin > *Subject:* Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hello Tyler & Don, We have started looking into the remaining work in Fault Containerization and looked into the earlier abandoned patch implementation (https://review.opendev.org/#/c/661423/). As we have joined the team newly, we would like to understand GUI and Horizon implementation and next steps to move forward regarding this pending activity. We had a initial discussion regarding this with Saul and Austin and based on their inputs, we would like to have a discussion. Please let me know if you need any clarification. Thanks & regards, Ambarish/Sanjay From haochuan.z.chen at intel.com Wed Aug 12 00:05:13 2020 From: haochuan.z.chen at intel.com (Chen, Haochuan Z) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 00:05:13 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] fix review for LP1888546 Message-ID: Hi Chris I have updated commit message, any more idea or concern, we could discuss. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/744486/ Thanks! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sharath.kumar at intel.com Wed Aug 12 04:48:18 2020 From: sharath.kumar at intel.com (Kumar, Sharath) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 04:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard In-Reply-To: References: <08A07A3B6772DE42BB77D7AE70889B8A8F09359C@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: Adding thread to starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io. From: Kumar, Sharath Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 10:02 AM To: Smith, Tyler ; Bhat, Gopalkrishna ; Das, Ambarish ; Penney, Don ; Mukherjee, Sanjay K Cc: Wold, Saul ; Jones, Bruce E ; Sun, Austin ; Eslimi, Dariush ; Wold, Saul Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Thanks a lot Tyler, it really helps. From: Smith, Tyler > Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 2:18 AM To: Kumar, Sharath >; Bhat, Gopalkrishna >; Das, Ambarish >; Penney, Don >; Mukherjee, Sanjay K > Cc: Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Sun, Austin >; Eslimi, Dariush >; Wold, Saul > Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Thanks Sarath, Ok I misunderstood the question, to build the flock layer you can use "build-pkgs starlingx-dashboard" to build our existing plugin. "build-pkgs python-django-horizon" will build horizon, but there shouldn't need to be any modifications to that. During development I tend to just copy over any altered files and restart horizon via "sm-restart service horizon", or using the dev server as you mentioned should be fine too. As for your question from IRC, the credentials to the dev server would be whatever is setup in keystone. Are you running the dev server on the controller? if not then you'll need to make sure your local_settings file is pointing to the controller via the openstack_host settings and others as documented here: https://docs.openstack.org/horizon/latest/contributor/quickstart.html Tyler From: Kumar, Sharath [mailto:sharath.kumar at intel.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 10:47 AM To: Bhat, Gopalkrishna >; Smith, Tyler >; Das, Ambarish >; Penney, Don >; Mukherjee, Sanjay K > Cc: Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Sun, Austin >; Eslimi, Dariush >; Wold, Saul > Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hi Tyler, Thank you for your time to let us present and review our approach document in the flock meeting. As discussed , attaching the approach document we presented today. To start with our approach, we need help on how to build GUI package only in the flock layer. As an example, we can build fault using "build-pkg fault" command. Other queries are highlighted in the approach document. Please let us know if you need any clarifications. Regards, Sharath From: Bhat, Gopalkrishna > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2020 10:15 PM To: Smith, Tyler >; Das, Ambarish >; Penney, Don >; Mukherjee, Sanjay K > Cc: Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Sun, Austin >; Eslimi, Dariush >; Kumar, Sharath >; Wold, Saul > Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hello Tyler , Would like to give heads-up that Sanjay & Sharath wanted to present the updates on the 2nd approach mentioned in the below email in tomorrow's community meeting .Hope you could be part of the meeting so that we can align on the next steps [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX Config/DC/Flock/Upgrade Bi-weekly Meeting 6:30am UST/7pm BLR Regards Gopi From: Smith, Tyler > Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 1:35 AM To: Das, Ambarish >; Penney, Don >; Mukherjee, Sanjay K > Cc: Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Bhat, Gopalkrishna >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Sun, Austin >; Eslimi, Dariush > Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hi Ambarish & Sanjay There were two approaches that were being looked at. The first was to use the same GUI plugin for both the platform horizon and containerized horizon, but only copy over the horizon 'enabled' files corresponding to the panels that we want to enable (fault panels in the containerized case). This is the approach that was tried but it ended up not working and required lots of hacks during the docker image build step, such as modifying the code, which we really want to avoid. The reasons it wasn't working weren't really clear to me, I didn't spend time debugging etc. Attached is some background on what was being discussed then. The decision was made to instead split our plugin into two, one for the platform panels, and one for just the fault panels. This will involve creating a new package next to starlingx-dashboard (in the same repo though) that has a similar structure but only has the relevant fault components. Including: Api/fm.py Api/rest/fm.py Dashboards/admin/active_alarms/ Static/dashboard/fault_management/ Enabled/ -> need the fm related enabled files in here, along with the banner view header section definition (see ADD_HEADER_SECTIONS). These files will get copied over in the docker image build step. The only other instruction in this step should be the csrftoken customization command from the attached email, which I think unfortunately is required. As for the settings for the containerized horizon, they are stored in the openstack helm application manifest here: openstack-armada-app/stx-openstack-helm/stx-openstack-helm/manifests/manifest.yaml My understanding is fault management will remain in the platform as well. A distributed cloud deployment will also have to be tested, as the dc_admin dashboard also queries fm. There's decent documentation on the plugin structure upstream: https://docs.openstack.org/horizon/latest/contributor/tutorials/plugin.html Let me know if you need more details Tyler From: Das, Ambarish [mailto:ambarish.das at intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 2:22 AM To: Penney, Don >; Smith, Tyler > Cc: Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Bhat, Gopalkrishna >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Mukherjee, Sanjay K >; Sun, Austin > Subject: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hello Tyler & Don, We have started looking into the remaining work in Fault Containerization and looked into the earlier abandoned patch implementation (https://review.opendev.org/#/c/661423/). As we have joined the team newly, we would like to understand GUI and Horizon implementation and next steps to move forward regarding this pending activity. We had a initial discussion regarding this with Saul and Austin and based on their inputs, we would like to have a discussion. Please let me know if you need any clarification. Thanks & regards, Ambarish/Sanjay -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Wed Aug 12 12:40:04 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 12:40:04 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Community (& TSC) Call (August 12, 2020) Message-ID: Hi all, reminder of the TSC/Community call coming up later today. Please feel free to add items to the agenda [0] for the community call. Bill... [0] etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-status [1] call details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings#7am_PDT_.2F_1400_UTC_-_Community_Call [2] meeting start time in various time-zones: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20200812T1400 From tyler.smith at windriver.com Wed Aug 12 13:55:44 2020 From: tyler.smith at windriver.com (Smith, Tyler) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 13:55:44 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard In-Reply-To: References: <08A07A3B6772DE42BB77D7AE70889B8A8F09359C@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: Also, Greg Waines should be able to answer high-level questions you have regarding the containerization of the backend fm services Tyler From: Kumar, Sharath [mailto:sharath.kumar at intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 12:48 AM To: Smith, Tyler ; Bhat, Gopalkrishna ; Das, Ambarish ; Penney, Don ; Mukherjee, Sanjay K Cc: Wold, Saul ; Jones, Bruce E ; Sun, Austin ; Eslimi, Dariush ; Wold, Saul ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Adding thread to starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io. From: Kumar, Sharath Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 10:02 AM To: Smith, Tyler >; Bhat, Gopalkrishna >; Das, Ambarish >; Penney, Don >; Mukherjee, Sanjay K > Cc: Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Sun, Austin >; Eslimi, Dariush >; Wold, Saul > Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Thanks a lot Tyler, it really helps. From: Smith, Tyler > Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 2:18 AM To: Kumar, Sharath >; Bhat, Gopalkrishna >; Das, Ambarish >; Penney, Don >; Mukherjee, Sanjay K > Cc: Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Sun, Austin >; Eslimi, Dariush >; Wold, Saul > Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Thanks Sarath, Ok I misunderstood the question, to build the flock layer you can use "build-pkgs starlingx-dashboard" to build our existing plugin. "build-pkgs python-django-horizon" will build horizon, but there shouldn't need to be any modifications to that. During development I tend to just copy over any altered files and restart horizon via "sm-restart service horizon", or using the dev server as you mentioned should be fine too. As for your question from IRC, the credentials to the dev server would be whatever is setup in keystone. Are you running the dev server on the controller? if not then you'll need to make sure your local_settings file is pointing to the controller via the openstack_host settings and others as documented here: https://docs.openstack.org/horizon/latest/contributor/quickstart.html Tyler From: Kumar, Sharath [mailto:sharath.kumar at intel.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 10:47 AM To: Bhat, Gopalkrishna >; Smith, Tyler >; Das, Ambarish >; Penney, Don >; Mukherjee, Sanjay K > Cc: Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Sun, Austin >; Eslimi, Dariush >; Wold, Saul > Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hi Tyler, Thank you for your time to let us present and review our approach document in the flock meeting. As discussed , attaching the approach document we presented today. To start with our approach, we need help on how to build GUI package only in the flock layer. As an example, we can build fault using "build-pkg fault" command. Other queries are highlighted in the approach document. Please let us know if you need any clarifications. Regards, Sharath From: Bhat, Gopalkrishna > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2020 10:15 PM To: Smith, Tyler >; Das, Ambarish >; Penney, Don >; Mukherjee, Sanjay K > Cc: Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Sun, Austin >; Eslimi, Dariush >; Kumar, Sharath >; Wold, Saul > Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hello Tyler , Would like to give heads-up that Sanjay & Sharath wanted to present the updates on the 2nd approach mentioned in the below email in tomorrow's community meeting .Hope you could be part of the meeting so that we can align on the next steps [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX Config/DC/Flock/Upgrade Bi-weekly Meeting 6:30am UST/7pm BLR Regards Gopi From: Smith, Tyler > Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 1:35 AM To: Das, Ambarish >; Penney, Don >; Mukherjee, Sanjay K > Cc: Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Bhat, Gopalkrishna >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Sun, Austin >; Eslimi, Dariush > Subject: RE: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hi Ambarish & Sanjay There were two approaches that were being looked at. The first was to use the same GUI plugin for both the platform horizon and containerized horizon, but only copy over the horizon 'enabled' files corresponding to the panels that we want to enable (fault panels in the containerized case). This is the approach that was tried but it ended up not working and required lots of hacks during the docker image build step, such as modifying the code, which we really want to avoid. The reasons it wasn't working weren't really clear to me, I didn't spend time debugging etc. Attached is some background on what was being discussed then. The decision was made to instead split our plugin into two, one for the platform panels, and one for just the fault panels. This will involve creating a new package next to starlingx-dashboard (in the same repo though) that has a similar structure but only has the relevant fault components. Including: Api/fm.py Api/rest/fm.py Dashboards/admin/active_alarms/ Static/dashboard/fault_management/ Enabled/ -> need the fm related enabled files in here, along with the banner view header section definition (see ADD_HEADER_SECTIONS). These files will get copied over in the docker image build step. The only other instruction in this step should be the csrftoken customization command from the attached email, which I think unfortunately is required. As for the settings for the containerized horizon, they are stored in the openstack helm application manifest here: openstack-armada-app/stx-openstack-helm/stx-openstack-helm/manifests/manifest.yaml My understanding is fault management will remain in the platform as well. A distributed cloud deployment will also have to be tested, as the dc_admin dashboard also queries fm. There's decent documentation on the plugin structure upstream: https://docs.openstack.org/horizon/latest/contributor/tutorials/plugin.html Let me know if you need more details Tyler From: Das, Ambarish [mailto:ambarish.das at intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 2:22 AM To: Penney, Don >; Smith, Tyler > Cc: Wold, Saul >; Jones, Bruce E >; Bhat, Gopalkrishna >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Mukherjee, Sanjay K >; Sun, Austin > Subject: Fault Containerization: Enable FM panels in Openstack Dashboard Hello Tyler & Don, We have started looking into the remaining work in Fault Containerization and looked into the earlier abandoned patch implementation (https://review.opendev.org/#/c/661423/). As we have joined the team newly, we would like to understand GUI and Horizon implementation and next steps to move forward regarding this pending activity. We had a initial discussion regarding this with Saul and Austin and based on their inputs, we would like to have a discussion. Please let me know if you need any clarification. Thanks & regards, Ambarish/Sanjay -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Wed Aug 12 14:26:16 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 14:26:16 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Community (& TSC) Call (August 12, 2020) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >From today's meeting: * Standing Topics * Sanity * all green since last week * Gerrit Reviews in Need of Attention * rook ceph: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:%22ceph+containerization%22 * Topics for this Week * RC and Release Build: http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009388.html * Saul summarized the detailed steps for doing RC & Release builds - Community encouraged to review & provide feedback * it'll end up in a wiki eventually * ARs from Previous Meetings * nothing this week * Open Requests for Help * Build Packages Error * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009352.html * Saul will have a look * userspace-cni-network-plugin support in starlingx?: * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009381.html * Networking team to have a look (or maybe the Containers team?) * Build Matters (if required) * nothing this week -----Original Message----- From: Zvonar, Bill Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 8:40 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Community (& TSC) Call (August 12, 2020) Hi all, reminder of the TSC/Community call coming up later today. Please feel free to add items to the agenda [0] for the community call. Bill... [0] etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-status [1] call details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings#7am_PDT_.2F_1400_UTC_-_Community_Call [2] meeting start time in various time-zones: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20200812T1400 From sgw at linux.intel.com Wed Aug 12 14:29:49 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 07:29:49 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Saul Resigning from StarlingX TSC Message-ID: <259f6af1-bdad-901f-a700-257d63b4672a@linux.intel.com> Hi Folks, I am departing from Intel and also from the StarlingX project, therefore I am resigning from the TSC. It's been a great couple of years working on StarlingX and developing an awesome community. I have really enjoying helping to start up the TSC and the community. I can always be found in LinkedIn (Not too many Saul Wolds out there) or by personal email: sgw at bigsur.com. Sau! From sgw at linux.intel.com Wed Aug 12 14:34:51 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 07:34:51 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Build Packages Error In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <11492308-f6de-16a0-7ad0-6b2c08f922f9@linux.intel.com> Hi Justin, Sorry did not notice this email. On 8/5/20 7:55 PM, Fu, Justin wrote: > Hi, > > I am working on building an ISO image according to this > link(https://docs.starlingx.io/developer_resources/build_guide.html#build-the-centos-mirror-repository). > However, when I execute build-pkgs to build the packages, the following > error is shown. It seems that a lot of rpms under std/ directory are > missing. > Not sure what the failure is, there is typically a message that tells one where to look for additional log information for each package failure. This might mean you failed to download the source rpms correctly, they would be in the cgcs-root/cgcs-centos-repo directory. Did you verify everything downloaded? Sau! > 16:31:41 *** Build Failed *** > > 16:31:41 Tried 2 times - following pkgs could not be successfully built: > > 16:31:41 *** Build Failed *** > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/kernel-4.18.0-147.3.1.el8_1.7.tis.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/bash-4.2.46-31.el7.tis.4.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/setup-2.8.71-10.el7.tis.11.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/pxe-network-installer-1.0-28.tis.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/python-2.7.5-76.el7.tis.4.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/systemd-219-67.el7.tis.10.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/openldap-2.4.44-20.el7.tis.6.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mariadb-10.1.28-1.el7.tis.8.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/ceph-13.2.2-0.el7.tis.64.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mlnx-ofa_kernel-5.0-OFED.5.0.2.1.8.1.g5f67178.tis.1.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/qat17-4.5.0-00034.tis.12.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtce-1.0-154.tis.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/openssh-7.4p1-16.el7_4.tis.8.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/grub2-2.02-0.76.el7.centos.tis.7.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/libvirt-4.7.0-1.tis.27.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtce-common-1.0-130.tis.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtce-guest-1.0-142.tis.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/openvswitch-2.11.0-0.tis.12.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/net-tools-2.0-0.24.20131004git.el7.tis.5.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/net-snmp-5.7.2-37.el7.tis.7.src.rpm > > 16:31:41 > /localdisk/loadbuild/user/project/std/rpmbuild/SRPMS/rabbitmq-server-3.6.5-1.el7.tis.7.src.rpm > > … > > BR, > > Justin Fu > > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss > From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Wed Aug 12 14:48:24 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 14:48:24 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200812T013433Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-12 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200812T013433Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200812T013433Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From bruce.e.jones at intel.com Wed Aug 12 14:54:03 2020 From: bruce.e.jones at intel.com (Jones, Bruce E) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 14:54:03 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Saul Resigning from StarlingX TSC In-Reply-To: <259f6af1-bdad-901f-a700-257d63b4672a@linux.intel.com> References: <259f6af1-bdad-901f-a700-257d63b4672a@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: Saul, thank you for your many contributions to the StarlingX project. And thank you for the leadership and guidance you have given to the community, that has been so important to the project's success. We wish you all the best on your next adventure! brucej -----Original Message----- From: Saul Wold Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:30 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Saul Resigning from StarlingX TSC Hi Folks, I am departing from Intel and also from the StarlingX project, therefore I am resigning from the TSC. It's been a great couple of years working on StarlingX and developing an awesome community. I have really enjoying helping to start up the TSC and the community. I can always be found in LinkedIn (Not too many Saul Wolds out there) or by personal email: sgw at bigsur.com. Sau! _______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From david.a.cobbley at intel.com Wed Aug 12 14:59:37 2020 From: david.a.cobbley at intel.com (Cobbley, David A) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 14:59:37 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Saul Resigning from StarlingX TSC In-Reply-To: References: <259f6af1-bdad-901f-a700-257d63b4672a@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <48312048-4399-4114-989D-5AB00B089561@intel.com> Saul, You will be missed. You're always a pleasure to work with, and you challenge us to always be doing the right things the right way with your questions. Thank you for your years of contributions to the open source community, and most recently, getting StarlingX off the ground. --David C On 8/12/20, 7:55 AM, "Jones, Bruce E" wrote: Saul, thank you for your many contributions to the StarlingX project. And thank you for the leadership and guidance you have given to the community, that has been so important to the project's success. We wish you all the best on your next adventure! brucej -----Original Message----- From: Saul Wold Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:30 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Saul Resigning from StarlingX TSC Hi Folks, I am departing from Intel and also from the StarlingX project, therefore I am resigning from the TSC. It's been a great couple of years working on StarlingX and developing an awesome community. I have really enjoying helping to start up the TSC and the community. I can always be found in LinkedIn (Not too many Saul Wolds out there) or by personal email: sgw at bigsur.com. Sau! _______________________________________________ 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 From Don.Penney at windriver.com Wed Aug 12 15:04:28 2020 From: Don.Penney at windriver.com (Penney, Don) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 15:04:28 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Saul Resigning from StarlingX TSC In-Reply-To: <48312048-4399-4114-989D-5AB00B089561@intel.com> References: <259f6af1-bdad-901f-a700-257d63b4672a@linux.intel.com> <48312048-4399-4114-989D-5AB00B089561@intel.com> Message-ID: +1! Thank you, Saul, for everything you've done for StarlingX. Your experience in the open source community has been invaluable! -----Original Message----- From: Cobbley, David A Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 11:00 AM To: Jones, Bruce E ; Saul Wold ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Saul Resigning from StarlingX TSC Saul, You will be missed. You're always a pleasure to work with, and you challenge us to always be doing the right things the right way with your questions. Thank you for your years of contributions to the open source community, and most recently, getting StarlingX off the ground. --David C On 8/12/20, 7:55 AM, "Jones, Bruce E" wrote: Saul, thank you for your many contributions to the StarlingX project. And thank you for the leadership and guidance you have given to the community, that has been so important to the project's success. We wish you all the best on your next adventure! brucej -----Original Message----- From: Saul Wold Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:30 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Saul Resigning from StarlingX TSC Hi Folks, I am departing from Intel and also from the StarlingX project, therefore I am resigning from the TSC. It's been a great couple of years working on StarlingX and developing an awesome community. I have really enjoying helping to start up the TSC and the community. I can always be found in LinkedIn (Not too many Saul Wolds out there) or by personal email: sgw at bigsur.com. Sau! _______________________________________________ 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 From nicolae.jascanu at intel.com Wed Aug 12 15:45:15 2020 From: nicolae.jascanu at intel.com (Jascanu, Nicolae) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 15:45:15 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Pratik, I've checked the digests for the tags: rc-3.0-centos-stable-20191212T162958Z.0 (from the versioned helm-chart) and rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest (form the latest helm-chart). It seems the images have different digests. As far as I know, the digest should be the same. @Sun, Austin - let me know if we need to fill in a bug for this. Regards, Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. TSD Software Engineer Internet Of Things Group Galati, Romania -----Original Message----- From: Pratik M. Sent: Monday, August 10, 2020 11:40 To: Jascanu, Nicolae ; Webster, Steven Cc: Sun, Austin ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Hi, Thank you for the help. I used stable-latest based on the documentation here: https://docs.starlingx.io/deploy_install_guides/r3_release/openstack/install.html#install-application-manifest-and-helm-charts I will try w/ stable-versioned and let you know. Should I open a documentation bug? I am not sure I still understand the reason why R3.0 OpenStack install worked earlier, but fails now. Can the tags move after a release? So the stable-latest OpenStack is from upstream's perspective (so no StarlingX sanity check)? Just trying to understand. [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ grep 'registry\.local' /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/stx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml | grep neutron neutron_bagpipe_bgp: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_db_sync: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_dhcp: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_l2gw: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_l3: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_linuxbridge_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_metadata: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_openvswitch_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_server: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_sriov_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_sriov_agent_init: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest Thanks in advance Pratik On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 1:03 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > Hi Pratik, > We installed the 3.0.0 image using the versioned helm-charts at: > http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/3.0.0/centos > /outputs/helm-charts/stx-openstack-1.0-19-centos-stable-versioned.tgz > > The sanity went well for simplex, duplex and standard external storage. > > Regards, > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > TSD Software Engineer > > > > Internet Of Things Group > Galati, Romania > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sun, Austin > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 18:05 > To: Pratik M. ; Jascanu, Nicolae > > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Hi Pratik: > The R3.0 images should tag as rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest. Would > you like check your env via this command > > grep 'registry\.local' > /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/s > tx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml > > Thanks. > BR > Austin Sun. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pratik M. > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 4:22 PM > To: Jascanu, Nicolae > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Thank you. I am using R3.0 19.12 (pl. see below). This seems to be a known issue. > http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-July/009270 > .html > > I guess the charts are OK, but the upstream docker images changed? So even though the tests passed when R3.0 was released, the openstack install will fail for everyone trying to use R3.0, now. > > [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ cat /etc/build.info ### ### StarlingX > ### Release 19.12 > ### > > OS="centos" > SW_VERSION="19.12" > BUILD_TARGET="Host Installer" > BUILD_TYPE="Formal" > BUILD_ID="r/stx.3.0" > > JOB="STX_BUILD_3.0" > BUILD_BY="starlingx.build at cengn.ca" > BUILD_NUMBER="21" > BUILD_HOST="starlingx_mirror" > BUILD_DATE="2019-12-13 02:30:00 +0000" > > Thanks > Pratik > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > > > Hi Pratik, > > We are using for regular sanity the tests located at: > > https://opendev.org/starlingx/test/src/branch/master/automated-robot > > -s > > uite/Tests > > > > Could you please tell what version you installed? > > The output of: cat /etc/build.info will be useful. > > > > Regards, > > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > > TSD Software Engineer > > > > > > > > Internet Of Things Group > > Galati, Romania > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Pratik M. > > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 13:12 > > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > > > Hi, > > I am seeing stx-openstack apply failure w/ R3.0. I am following the > > steps from documentation. Seems others are seeing this too > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1889023 > > > > But the "Sanity OpenStack" TC must have passed, so I want to compare my steps with the ones there, to figure out if there is a difference. > > Can someone point me to either the code or the output of the test cases? > > > > Thanks > > Pratik > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 From Don.Penney at windriver.com Wed Aug 12 15:54:17 2020 From: Don.Penney at windriver.com (Penney, Don) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 15:54:17 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The -latest image tags move with each build. If the RC3 images are rebuilt, the -latest tags will be updated. The stx-openstack-1.0-19-centos-stable-versioned.tgz application tarball should therefore be used for testing. -----Original Message----- From: Jascanu, Nicolae Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 11:45 AM To: Pratik M. ; Webster, Steven ; Sun, Austin Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Hi Pratik, I've checked the digests for the tags: rc-3.0-centos-stable-20191212T162958Z.0 (from the versioned helm-chart) and rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest (form the latest helm-chart). It seems the images have different digests. As far as I know, the digest should be the same. @Sun, Austin - let me know if we need to fill in a bug for this. Regards, Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. TSD Software Engineer Internet Of Things Group Galati, Romania -----Original Message----- From: Pratik M. Sent: Monday, August 10, 2020 11:40 To: Jascanu, Nicolae ; Webster, Steven Cc: Sun, Austin ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Hi, Thank you for the help. I used stable-latest based on the documentation here: https://docs.starlingx.io/deploy_install_guides/r3_release/openstack/install.html#install-application-manifest-and-helm-charts I will try w/ stable-versioned and let you know. Should I open a documentation bug? I am not sure I still understand the reason why R3.0 OpenStack install worked earlier, but fails now. Can the tags move after a release? So the stable-latest OpenStack is from upstream's perspective (so no StarlingX sanity check)? Just trying to understand. [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ grep 'registry\.local' /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/stx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml | grep neutron neutron_bagpipe_bgp: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_db_sync: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_dhcp: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_l2gw: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_l3: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_linuxbridge_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_metadata: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_openvswitch_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_server: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_sriov_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_sriov_agent_init: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest Thanks in advance Pratik On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 1:03 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > Hi Pratik, > We installed the 3.0.0 image using the versioned helm-charts at: > http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/3.0.0/centos > /outputs/helm-charts/stx-openstack-1.0-19-centos-stable-versioned.tgz > > The sanity went well for simplex, duplex and standard external storage. > > Regards, > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > TSD Software Engineer > > > > Internet Of Things Group > Galati, Romania > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sun, Austin > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 18:05 > To: Pratik M. ; Jascanu, Nicolae > > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Hi Pratik: > The R3.0 images should tag as rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest. Would > you like check your env via this command > > grep 'registry\.local' > /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/s > tx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml > > Thanks. > BR > Austin Sun. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pratik M. > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 4:22 PM > To: Jascanu, Nicolae > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Thank you. I am using R3.0 19.12 (pl. see below). This seems to be a known issue. > http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-July/009270 > .html > > I guess the charts are OK, but the upstream docker images changed? So even though the tests passed when R3.0 was released, the openstack install will fail for everyone trying to use R3.0, now. > > [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ cat /etc/build.info ### ### StarlingX > ### Release 19.12 > ### > > OS="centos" > SW_VERSION="19.12" > BUILD_TARGET="Host Installer" > BUILD_TYPE="Formal" > BUILD_ID="r/stx.3.0" > > JOB="STX_BUILD_3.0" > BUILD_BY="starlingx.build at cengn.ca" > BUILD_NUMBER="21" > BUILD_HOST="starlingx_mirror" > BUILD_DATE="2019-12-13 02:30:00 +0000" > > Thanks > Pratik > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > > > Hi Pratik, > > We are using for regular sanity the tests located at: > > https://opendev.org/starlingx/test/src/branch/master/automated-robot > > -s > > uite/Tests > > > > Could you please tell what version you installed? > > The output of: cat /etc/build.info will be useful. > > > > Regards, > > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > > TSD Software Engineer > > > > > > > > Internet Of Things Group > > Galati, Romania > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Pratik M. > > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 13:12 > > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > > > Hi, > > I am seeing stx-openstack apply failure w/ R3.0. I am following the > > steps from documentation. Seems others are seeing this too > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1889023 > > > > But the "Sanity OpenStack" TC must have passed, so I want to compare my steps with the ones there, to figure out if there is a difference. > > Can someone point me to either the code or the output of the test cases? > > > > Thanks > > Pratik > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 From nicolae.jascanu at intel.com Wed Aug 12 16:04:50 2020 From: nicolae.jascanu at intel.com (Jascanu, Nicolae) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 16:04:50 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Don, Indeed the tag: latest might point to a different image. But, this is a milestone release (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/3.0.0/centos) and it is confusing if the latest and versioned helm-charts are pointing to different container versions. Regards, Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. TSD Software Engineer Internet Of Things Group Galati, Romania -----Original Message----- From: Penney, Don Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 18:54 To: Jascanu, Nicolae ; Pratik M. ; Webster, Steven ; Sun, Austin Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output The -latest image tags move with each build. If the RC3 images are rebuilt, the -latest tags will be updated. The stx-openstack-1.0-19-centos-stable-versioned.tgz application tarball should therefore be used for testing. -----Original Message----- From: Jascanu, Nicolae Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 11:45 AM To: Pratik M. ; Webster, Steven ; Sun, Austin Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Hi Pratik, I've checked the digests for the tags: rc-3.0-centos-stable-20191212T162958Z.0 (from the versioned helm-chart) and rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest (form the latest helm-chart). It seems the images have different digests. As far as I know, the digest should be the same. @Sun, Austin - let me know if we need to fill in a bug for this. Regards, Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. TSD Software Engineer Internet Of Things Group Galati, Romania -----Original Message----- From: Pratik M. Sent: Monday, August 10, 2020 11:40 To: Jascanu, Nicolae ; Webster, Steven Cc: Sun, Austin ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Hi, Thank you for the help. I used stable-latest based on the documentation here: https://docs.starlingx.io/deploy_install_guides/r3_release/openstack/install.html#install-application-manifest-and-helm-charts I will try w/ stable-versioned and let you know. Should I open a documentation bug? I am not sure I still understand the reason why R3.0 OpenStack install worked earlier, but fails now. Can the tags move after a release? So the stable-latest OpenStack is from upstream's perspective (so no StarlingX sanity check)? Just trying to understand. [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ grep 'registry\.local' /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/stx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml | grep neutron neutron_bagpipe_bgp: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_db_sync: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_dhcp: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_l2gw: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_l3: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_linuxbridge_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_metadata: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_openvswitch_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_server: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_sriov_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_sriov_agent_init: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest Thanks in advance Pratik On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 1:03 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > Hi Pratik, > We installed the 3.0.0 image using the versioned helm-charts at: > http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/3.0.0/centos > /outputs/helm-charts/stx-openstack-1.0-19-centos-stable-versioned.tgz > > The sanity went well for simplex, duplex and standard external storage. > > Regards, > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > TSD Software Engineer > > > > Internet Of Things Group > Galati, Romania > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sun, Austin > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 18:05 > To: Pratik M. ; Jascanu, Nicolae > > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Hi Pratik: > The R3.0 images should tag as rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest. Would > you like check your env via this command > > grep 'registry\.local' > /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/s > tx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml > > Thanks. > BR > Austin Sun. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pratik M. > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 4:22 PM > To: Jascanu, Nicolae > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Thank you. I am using R3.0 19.12 (pl. see below). This seems to be a known issue. > http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-July/009270 > .html > > I guess the charts are OK, but the upstream docker images changed? So even though the tests passed when R3.0 was released, the openstack install will fail for everyone trying to use R3.0, now. > > [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ cat /etc/build.info ### ### StarlingX > ### Release 19.12 > ### > > OS="centos" > SW_VERSION="19.12" > BUILD_TARGET="Host Installer" > BUILD_TYPE="Formal" > BUILD_ID="r/stx.3.0" > > JOB="STX_BUILD_3.0" > BUILD_BY="starlingx.build at cengn.ca" > BUILD_NUMBER="21" > BUILD_HOST="starlingx_mirror" > BUILD_DATE="2019-12-13 02:30:00 +0000" > > Thanks > Pratik > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > > > Hi Pratik, > > We are using for regular sanity the tests located at: > > https://opendev.org/starlingx/test/src/branch/master/automated-robot > > -s > > uite/Tests > > > > Could you please tell what version you installed? > > The output of: cat /etc/build.info will be useful. > > > > Regards, > > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > > TSD Software Engineer > > > > > > > > Internet Of Things Group > > Galati, Romania > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Pratik M. > > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 13:12 > > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > > > Hi, > > I am seeing stx-openstack apply failure w/ R3.0. I am following the > > steps from documentation. Seems others are seeing this too > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1889023 > > > > But the "Sanity OpenStack" TC must have passed, so I want to compare my steps with the ones there, to figure out if there is a difference. > > Can someone point me to either the code or the output of the test cases? > > > > Thanks > > Pratik > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 From ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 16:13:11 2020 From: ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com (Ildiko Vancsa) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 18:13:11 +0200 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Saul Resigning from StarlingX TSC In-Reply-To: <259f6af1-bdad-901f-a700-257d63b4672a@linux.intel.com> References: <259f6af1-bdad-901f-a700-257d63b4672a@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <4B0FFE9B-5986-4578-A41E-A87A68FF5D7F@gmail.com> Hi Saul, I’m sad to learn that you are leaving the community. I would like to say a huge thank you for all your contributions and work that were key to build and shape the community! I wish you all the best in your new adventures and I hope we will see you again in the community some time in the future. Thanks and Best Regards, Ildikó > On Aug 12, 2020, at 16:29, Saul Wold wrote: > > > Hi Folks, > > I am departing from Intel and also from the StarlingX project, therefore I am resigning from the TSC. > > It's been a great couple of years working on StarlingX and developing an awesome community. I have really enjoying helping to start up the TSC and the community. > > I can always be found in LinkedIn (Not too many Saul Wolds out there) or by personal email: sgw at bigsur.com. > > Sau! > > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From Don.Penney at windriver.com Wed Aug 12 16:15:22 2020 From: Don.Penney at windriver.com (Penney, Don) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 16:15:22 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: My two cents, then, would be to remove the -latest tarballs from this directory, as they are not appropriate for a milestone release. -----Original Message----- From: Jascanu, Nicolae Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 12:05 PM To: Penney, Don ; Pratik M. ; Webster, Steven ; Sun, Austin Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Hi Don, Indeed the tag: latest might point to a different image. But, this is a milestone release (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/3.0.0/centos) and it is confusing if the latest and versioned helm-charts are pointing to different container versions. Regards, Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. TSD Software Engineer Internet Of Things Group Galati, Romania -----Original Message----- From: Penney, Don Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 18:54 To: Jascanu, Nicolae ; Pratik M. ; Webster, Steven ; Sun, Austin Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output The -latest image tags move with each build. If the RC3 images are rebuilt, the -latest tags will be updated. The stx-openstack-1.0-19-centos-stable-versioned.tgz application tarball should therefore be used for testing. -----Original Message----- From: Jascanu, Nicolae Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 11:45 AM To: Pratik M. ; Webster, Steven ; Sun, Austin Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Hi Pratik, I've checked the digests for the tags: rc-3.0-centos-stable-20191212T162958Z.0 (from the versioned helm-chart) and rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest (form the latest helm-chart). It seems the images have different digests. As far as I know, the digest should be the same. @Sun, Austin - let me know if we need to fill in a bug for this. Regards, Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. TSD Software Engineer Internet Of Things Group Galati, Romania -----Original Message----- From: Pratik M. Sent: Monday, August 10, 2020 11:40 To: Jascanu, Nicolae ; Webster, Steven Cc: Sun, Austin ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output Hi, Thank you for the help. I used stable-latest based on the documentation here: https://docs.starlingx.io/deploy_install_guides/r3_release/openstack/install.html#install-application-manifest-and-helm-charts I will try w/ stable-versioned and let you know. Should I open a documentation bug? I am not sure I still understand the reason why R3.0 OpenStack install worked earlier, but fails now. Can the tags move after a release? So the stable-latest OpenStack is from upstream's perspective (so no StarlingX sanity check)? Just trying to understand. [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ grep 'registry\.local' /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/stx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml | grep neutron neutron_bagpipe_bgp: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_db_sync: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_dhcp: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_l2gw: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_l3: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_linuxbridge_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_metadata: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_openvswitch_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_server: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_sriov_agent: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest neutron_sriov_agent_init: registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest Thanks in advance Pratik On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 1:03 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > Hi Pratik, > We installed the 3.0.0 image using the versioned helm-charts at: > http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/3.0.0/centos > /outputs/helm-charts/stx-openstack-1.0-19-centos-stable-versioned.tgz > > The sanity went well for simplex, duplex and standard external storage. > > Regards, > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > TSD Software Engineer > > > > Internet Of Things Group > Galati, Romania > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sun, Austin > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 18:05 > To: Pratik M. ; Jascanu, Nicolae > > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Hi Pratik: > The R3.0 images should tag as rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest. Would > you like check your env via this command > > grep 'registry\.local' > /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/s > tx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml > > Thanks. > BR > Austin Sun. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pratik M. > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 4:22 PM > To: Jascanu, Nicolae > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Thank you. I am using R3.0 19.12 (pl. see below). This seems to be a known issue. > http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-July/009270 > .html > > I guess the charts are OK, but the upstream docker images changed? So even though the tests passed when R3.0 was released, the openstack install will fail for everyone trying to use R3.0, now. > > [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ cat /etc/build.info ### ### StarlingX > ### Release 19.12 > ### > > OS="centos" > SW_VERSION="19.12" > BUILD_TARGET="Host Installer" > BUILD_TYPE="Formal" > BUILD_ID="r/stx.3.0" > > JOB="STX_BUILD_3.0" > BUILD_BY="starlingx.build at cengn.ca" > BUILD_NUMBER="21" > BUILD_HOST="starlingx_mirror" > BUILD_DATE="2019-12-13 02:30:00 +0000" > > Thanks > Pratik > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > > > Hi Pratik, > > We are using for regular sanity the tests located at: > > https://opendev.org/starlingx/test/src/branch/master/automated-robot > > -s > > uite/Tests > > > > Could you please tell what version you installed? > > The output of: cat /etc/build.info will be useful. > > > > Regards, > > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > > TSD Software Engineer > > > > > > > > Internet Of Things Group > > Galati, Romania > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Pratik M. > > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 13:12 > > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > > > Hi, > > I am seeing stx-openstack apply failure w/ R3.0. I am following the > > steps from documentation. Seems others are seeing this too > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1889023 > > > > But the "Sanity OpenStack" TC must have passed, so I want to compare my steps with the ones there, to figure out if there is a difference. > > Can someone point me to either the code or the output of the test cases? > > > > Thanks > > Pratik > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 From bruce.e.jones at intel.com Wed Aug 12 16:35:43 2020 From: bruce.e.jones at intel.com (Jones, Bruce E) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 16:35:43 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Etherpad for small node discussion Message-ID: I caught an action at the TSC/community meeting today to take the discussion on small nodes in the TSC etherpad and move it to a separate etherpad. I've finished the action and have a first draft [1]. Please review the draft. Feel free to add comments, post questions or make changes as needed. Brucej [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/stx-small-nodes -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From maryx.camp at intel.com Wed Aug 12 21:12:46 2020 From: maryx.camp at intel.com (Camp, MaryX) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 21:12:46 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [docs] [meeting] Docs team notes 2020-08-12 Message-ID: Hello all, Here are this week's docs team meeting minutes (short form). Details in [2]. Join us if you have interest in StarlingX docs! We meet on Wednesdays 12:30 PST.   [1]   Call logistics: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings   [2]   Tracking Etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-documentation thanks, Mary Camp ========== 2020-08-12  . All -- reviews merged since last meeting:  1  . All -- bug status -- 7 total, all low priority o [ww31]  Documentation regarding build-srpm.data is unclear [defer till after R4] o [ww30] 2: Changes in starlingx-api-ref.rst [low, WIP by Wenping Song], request to change install method (using rsync instead of STX mirror site) [defer till after R4] o [ww29] 2: Doc suggestions [not started-defer till after R4], Rename "active-backup" [WIP-low] o [ww25] Remove hardcoded "r1" in build scripts & docs [defer till after R4] o [ww20] Networking documentation [defer, may be resolved after WR docs are upstreamed] . Reviews in progress:    o Several reviews related to Rook   All -- Opens . Welcome Wind River Tech Pubs team members: Juanita, Ron, Oliver . Regarding the Rook reviews, Ildikó made the suggestion to mark these iterative reviews with "WIP" in the beginning of the title commit message until they are actually ready for review. (Better than Workflow -1 since you have to remember to reset the W -1 each time you make a commit.)  . Upstreaming WR docs  o Juanita and Ron are working on the docs and will continue to support the docs effort. o Oliver will be working on the process of moving from the DITA source into RST files.  o Expect to have more detail next week: status on plans/schedule for upstreaming the docs. . Will be posting reviews, etc. to follow the normal process. . Figure out the organization of where things will go, start smaller with ~5 reviews, figure out the batches, etc.  . Doing a local build of the commercial WR docs different from the STX docs, may not impact STX but need to figure out the plan. . Suggestion to get more reviewers to focus on this: from Intel, from WR, across the community to help with this task. Greg to get 4-5 WR, Bruce to ask 4-5 on the Intel side.  . Targets: next week: another update on status. Week after that they expect to start with reviews.  . AR Mary: Post on the mailing list & bring up on the Community call -- this is coming, we will have a bunch of doc reviews coming, appreciate your help.  . Focus of review? WR folks should've seen it before, so maybe presentation or diffs between STX? TBD  . ? about tips & tricks and pain points. Pointed to the wiki for general docs team info [https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StarlingX/Docs_and_Infra] and doc contributor guide [https://docs.starlingx.io/contributor/doc_contribute_guide.html]  . Mary is available to help with reviews or general questions. . ? about graphics/diagrams. Right now, not many diagrams in STX docs, typically PNG or JPG files. We don't archive the source file. Need to come up with a process in the Upstreaming plan. . ? about complex tables. We don't have those in STX docs. Need to come up with a process in the Upstreaming plan. . Version/tagging of STX docs. Still looking into how to make this work, Ildiko has another contact. We may need to create a test project, add the www/templates folder, and start deleting to see what's not necessary.  o For reference, OpenStack things are documented here:  o OpenStack doc tool scripts: https://docs.openstack.org/doc-contrib-guide/doc-tools/scripts.html o    repo here: https://opendev.org/openstack/openstack-doc-tools o OpenStack template generator: https://docs.openstack.org/doc-contrib-guide/doc-tools/template-generator.html From Don.Penney at windriver.com Thu Aug 13 01:20:51 2020 From: Don.Penney at windriver.com (Penney, Don) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 01:20:51 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules from June build? Message-ID: Hi folks, It was discovered that the recent stx-platformclients image was not picking up recent changes made to the distributedcloud-client package (I believe a Launchpad will be raised shortly). Tracing back through the CENGN build logs, the problem appears to stem from the changes introduced by: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737456/11/build-tools/build-docker-images/docker-image-build.cfg So for specific images, including stx-platformclients, the image build is now using a reference to a presumably static tarball: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/stx-centos-py2_stable-wheels.tar Looking at the dir listing, we can see this tarball is dated June 23rd: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/ What this means is that these particular images will be using this locked tarball for installing python modules from the wheels (ie. The PIP_PACKAGES list)... which means that an image like stx-platformclients, which is getting various starlingx clients from wheels, will only ever have content from that June 23rd build. Was this the intended behavior? Instead of this "alternate wheels tarball", shouldn't we be generating a wheels tarball with both py2 and py3 support, as long as we're building any py2 images? Thanks, Don. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com Thu Aug 13 02:06:17 2020 From: Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com (Khalil, Ghada) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 02:06:17 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules from June build? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The launchpad is: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1891416 From: Penney, Don Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 9:21 PM To: 'starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io' ; Liu, ZhipengS (zhipengs.liu at intel.com) ; Miller, Frank Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules from June build? Hi folks, It was discovered that the recent stx-platformclients image was not picking up recent changes made to the distributedcloud-client package (I believe a Launchpad will be raised shortly). Tracing back through the CENGN build logs, the problem appears to stem from the changes introduced by: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737456/11/build-tools/build-docker-images/docker-image-build.cfg So for specific images, including stx-platformclients, the image build is now using a reference to a presumably static tarball: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/stx-centos-py2_stable-wheels.tar Looking at the dir listing, we can see this tarball is dated June 23rd: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/ What this means is that these particular images will be using this locked tarball for installing python modules from the wheels (ie. The PIP_PACKAGES list)... which means that an image like stx-platformclients, which is getting various starlingx clients from wheels, will only ever have content from that June 23rd build. Was this the intended behavior? Instead of this "alternate wheels tarball", shouldn't we be generating a wheels tarball with both py2 and py3 support, as long as we're building any py2 images? Thanks, Don. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Thu Aug 13 06:09:39 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 06:09:39 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200813T013437Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-13 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200813T013437Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: RED Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200813T013437Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz Reason: wrong cert-manager version. Error: 08:40:07 [2020-08-13T05:40:07.032Z] fatal: [localhost]: FAILED! => {"changed": false, "msg": "/usr/local/share/applications/helm/cert-manager-1.0-5.tgz doesn't exist"} There exist an older bug opened for a similar issue: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1886742 The version of cert-manager found in /usr/local/share/applications/helm/ is 1.0.6. Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 20513 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From pvmpublic at gmail.com Thu Aug 13 07:03:38 2020 From: pvmpublic at gmail.com (Pratik M.) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 12:33:38 +0530 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you everyone for your inputs. I used stable-versioned and it worked. I also raised a documentation bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1891438 Thanks On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 9:45 PM Penney, Don wrote: > > My two cents, then, would be to remove the -latest tarballs from this directory, as they are not appropriate for a milestone release. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jascanu, Nicolae > Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 12:05 PM > To: Penney, Don ; Pratik M. ; Webster, Steven ; Sun, Austin > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Hi Don, > Indeed the tag: latest might point to a different image. But, this is a milestone release (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/3.0.0/centos) and it is confusing if the latest and versioned helm-charts are pointing to different container versions. > > Regards, > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > TSD Software Engineer > > > > Internet Of Things Group > Galati, Romania > > -----Original Message----- > From: Penney, Don > Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 18:54 > To: Jascanu, Nicolae ; Pratik M. ; Webster, Steven ; Sun, Austin > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > The -latest image tags move with each build. If the RC3 images are rebuilt, the -latest tags will be updated. > > The stx-openstack-1.0-19-centos-stable-versioned.tgz application tarball should therefore be used for testing. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jascanu, Nicolae > Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 11:45 AM > To: Pratik M. ; Webster, Steven ; Sun, Austin > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Hi Pratik, > I've checked the digests for the tags: rc-3.0-centos-stable-20191212T162958Z.0 (from the versioned helm-chart) and rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest (form the latest helm-chart). > It seems the images have different digests. As far as I know, the digest should be the same. > @Sun, Austin - let me know if we need to fill in a bug for this. > > Regards, > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > TSD Software Engineer > > > > Internet Of Things Group > Galati, Romania > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pratik M. > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2020 11:40 > To: Jascanu, Nicolae ; Webster, Steven > Cc: Sun, Austin ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > Hi, > Thank you for the help. I used stable-latest based on the documentation here: > https://docs.starlingx.io/deploy_install_guides/r3_release/openstack/install.html#install-application-manifest-and-helm-charts > > I will try w/ stable-versioned and let you know. Should I open a documentation bug? > > I am not sure I still understand the reason why R3.0 OpenStack install worked earlier, but fails now. Can the tags move after a release? So the stable-latest OpenStack is from upstream's perspective (so no StarlingX sanity check)? Just trying to understand. > > [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ grep 'registry\.local' > /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/stx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml > | grep neutron > neutron_bagpipe_bgp: > registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest > neutron_db_sync: > registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest > neutron_dhcp: > registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest > neutron_l2gw: > registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest > neutron_l3: > registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest > neutron_linuxbridge_agent: > registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest > neutron_metadata: > registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest > neutron_openvswitch_agent: > registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest > neutron_server: > registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest > neutron_sriov_agent: > registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest > neutron_sriov_agent_init: > registry.local:9001/docker.io/starlingx/stx-neutron:rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest > > > Thanks in advance > Pratik > > > On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 1:03 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > > > Hi Pratik, > > We installed the 3.0.0 image using the versioned helm-charts at: > > http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/release/3.0.0/centos > > /outputs/helm-charts/stx-openstack-1.0-19-centos-stable-versioned.tgz > > > > The sanity went well for simplex, duplex and standard external storage. > > > > Regards, > > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > > TSD Software Engineer > > > > > > > > Internet Of Things Group > > Galati, Romania > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sun, Austin > > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 18:05 > > To: Pratik M. ; Jascanu, Nicolae > > > > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > > Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > > > Hi Pratik: > > The R3.0 images should tag as rc-3.0-centos-stable-latest. Would > > you like check your env via this command > > > > grep 'registry\.local' > > /opt/platform/armada/19.12/stx-openstack/1.0-19-centos-stable-latest/s > > tx-openstack-stx-openstack.yaml > > > > Thanks. > > BR > > Austin Sun. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Pratik M. > > Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 4:22 PM > > To: Jascanu, Nicolae > > Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > > Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > > > Thank you. I am using R3.0 19.12 (pl. see below). This seems to be a known issue. > > http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-July/009270 > > .html > > > > I guess the charts are OK, but the upstream docker images changed? So even though the tests passed when R3.0 was released, the openstack install will fail for everyone trying to use R3.0, now. > > > > [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ cat /etc/build.info ### ### StarlingX > > ### Release 19.12 > > ### > > > > OS="centos" > > SW_VERSION="19.12" > > BUILD_TARGET="Host Installer" > > BUILD_TYPE="Formal" > > BUILD_ID="r/stx.3.0" > > > > JOB="STX_BUILD_3.0" > > BUILD_BY="starlingx.build at cengn.ca" > > BUILD_NUMBER="21" > > BUILD_HOST="starlingx_mirror" > > BUILD_DATE="2019-12-13 02:30:00 +0000" > > > > Thanks > > Pratik > > > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jascanu, Nicolae wrote: > > > > > > Hi Pratik, > > > We are using for regular sanity the tests located at: > > > https://opendev.org/starlingx/test/src/branch/master/automated-robot > > > -s > > > uite/Tests > > > > > > Could you please tell what version you installed? > > > The output of: cat /etc/build.info will be useful. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D. > > > TSD Software Engineer > > > > > > > > > > > > Internet Of Things Group > > > Galati, Romania > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Pratik M. > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 13:12 > > > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > > > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity TC code or output > > > > > > Hi, > > > I am seeing stx-openstack apply failure w/ R3.0. I am following the > > > steps from documentation. Seems others are seeing this too > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1889023 > > > > > > But the "Sanity OpenStack" TC must have passed, so I want to compare my steps with the ones there, to figure out if there is a difference. > > > Can someone point me to either the code or the output of the test cases? > > > > > > Thanks > > > Pratik > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 From Barton.Wensley at windriver.com Thu Aug 13 14:06:41 2020 From: Barton.Wensley at windriver.com (Wensley, Barton) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:06:41 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Shuicheng. I want to comment on this: 1. "stx_admin" password info will be updated automatically when host admin account's password is changed. [Bart] What mechanism will be used to do this? [Shuicheng] There is a keystone listener in sysinv which could receive notification when admin password is changed. So we could sync the new password to stxadmin account by sysinv. I need save stxadmin current password in keyring also, in order to communicate with keystone to update the new password. BTW, I am not sure whether this sync is must or not. There are 2 ways to handle the password of stxadmin. * Create stxadmin account with a random complex password, and leave it unchanged. * Use host admin password, and update it when host admin's password is changed. 1st method will make code simpler and easy to maintain. What is your suggestion for it? Thanks. I don't think sysinv communicates with the OpenStack application at all, so I don't think it should be involved in handling any password changes. I think you will need to store the stxadmin password in keyring, so it is accessible to the VIM - you can do that from wherever you are creating the stxadmin user. My preference would be option a above - use a random complex password for the new stxadmin user and do not support changes to this password. Bart From: Lin, Shuicheng Sent: August 7, 2020 3:47 AM To: Wensley, Barton ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: RE: Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password Hi Bart, Please see my reply inline. For the admin password info in pod secrets, I am not sure when and how it is used. Openstack services communicate with each other don't use admin auth. So no other issue is found yet after admin password change. I will do more test later. Best Regards Shuicheng From: Wensley, Barton > Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 9:20 PM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password Resending with only the mailing list in the "To" as it wouldn't go through otherwise. From: Wensley, Barton Sent: August 6, 2020 9:17 AM To: Lin, Shuicheng >; Hu, Yong >; Sun, Austin >; Liu, ZhipengS >; Church, Robert >; Friesen, Chris >; Kung, John >; Ning, Antai (Andy) >; Penney, Don >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; Miller, Frank >; Wold, Saul >; Rowsell, Brent > Subject: RE: Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password Shuicheng, Your overall approach of creating a new stx-admin user to allow the platform to access the stx-openstack services sounds reasonable to me. I'd like some more details though - see my questions in your email below. Another question - how will the pod based openstack services handle the change to the admin password? That needs to be understood as well. Bart From: Lin, Shuicheng > Sent: August 5, 2020 8:24 PM To: Hu, Yong >; Sun, Austin >; Liu, ZhipengS >; Church, Robert >; Friesen, Chris >; Wensley, Barton >; Kung, John >; Ning, Antai (Andy) >; Penney, Don >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; Miller, Frank >; Wold, Saul >; Rowsell, Brent > Subject: RE: Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password + mail list. Best Regards Shuicheng From: Lin, Shuicheng Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 7:04 PM To: Hu, Yong >; Sun, Austin >; Liu, ZhipengS >; Church, Robert >; Friesen, Chris >; Wensley, Barton >; 'Kung, John' >; Ning, Antai (Andy) >; Penney, Don > Cc: Khalil, Ghada >; 'Miller, Frank' >; Wold, Saul >; Rowsell, Brent > Subject: Solution for LP1887755: openstack app's admin account gets locked after change password Hi all, Please help loop in any person who have interest for this issue. Here is the LP link: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1887755 The issue is that there are 2 admin account in STX. 1 for host keystone, 1 for openstack app's keystone. Both account's password could be changed independently. For this LP issue, it is openstack app's admin account password is changed, but host flock service doesn't know it, and try to access openstack app's keystone with the old password, and lead to account be locked by keystone. There are 2 problems here: 1. Host flock service doesn't know openstack app's admin password is changed. 2. Host flock service cannot get the new password. So, in order to solve the issue, I plan to create a new account like "stx_admin" in openstack app, which will be used by flock service to communicate with openstack app. For this "stx_admin" account, it will share the same password as host admin account. And password info will be synced with the host admin account. So the behavior will like below: 1. Admin account "stx_admin" will be created automatically when stx-openstack app is applied. [Bart] Will this be done through the helm charts in the stx-openstack application? I'd prefer not to use underscores in user names - I think stxadmin or stx-admin would be better. [Shuicheng] Let me try to create the account by helm charts. Otherwise, I need create it by openstack client cmd after application is applied. I will use stxadmin as the name. Thanks for the suggestion. 1. "stx_admin" password info will be updated automatically when host admin account's password is changed. [Bart] What mechanism will be used to do this? [Shuicheng] There is a keystone listener in sysinv which could receive notification when admin password is changed. So we could sync the new password to stxadmin account by sysinv. I need save stxadmin current password in keyring also, in order to communicate with keystone to update the new password. BTW, I am not sure whether this sync is must or not. There are 2 ways to handle the password of stxadmin. * Create stxadmin account with a random complex password, and leave it unchanged. * Use host admin password, and update it when host admin's password is changed. 1st method will make code simpler and easy to maintain. What is your suggestion for it? Thanks. 1. Host flock service like nfv_vim/pci-irq-affinity-agent will use "stx_admin" account to communicate with stx-openstack app. 2. "stx_admin" account and admin account in openstack app are independent of each other. Please share me your opinion of this solution, and whether there is any other better solution. I am going to implement it if there is no objection. Thanks. Best Regards Shuicheng -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kennelson11 at gmail.com Thu Aug 13 16:19:37 2020 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 09:19:37 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] vPTG October 2020 Team Signup Message-ID: Greetings! As you hopefully already know, our next PTG will be virtual again, and held from Monday October 26th to Friday October 30th. We will have the same schedule set up available as last time with three windows of time spread across the day to cover all timezones with breaks in between. *To signup your team, you must complete **BOTH** the survey[1] AND reserve time in the ethercalc[2] by September 11th at 7:00 UTC.* We ask that the PTL/SIG Chair/Team lead sign up for time to have their discussions in with 4 rules/guidelines. 1. Cross project discussions (like SIGs or support project teams) should be scheduled towards the start of the week so that any discussions that might shape those of other teams happen first. 2. No team should sign up for more than 4 hours per UTC day to help keep participants actively engaged. 3. No team should sign up for more than 16 hours across all time slots to avoid burning out our contributors and to enable participation in multiple teams discussions. Again, you need to fill out BOTH the ethercalc AND the survey to complete your team's sign up. If you have any issues with signing up your team, due to conflict or otherwise, please let me know! While we are trying to empower you to make your own decisions as to when you meet and for how long (after all, you know your needs and teams timezones better than we do), we are here to help! Once your team is signed up, please register! And remind your team to register! Registration is free, but since it will be how we contact you with passwords, event details, etc. it is still important! Continue to check back for updates at openstack.org/ptg. -the Kendalls (diablo_rojo & wendallkaters) [1] Team Survey: https://openstackfoundation.formstack.com/forms/june2020_virtual_ptg_survey [2] Ethercalc Signup: https://ethercalc.openstack.org/126u8ek25noy [3] PTG Registration: https://october2020ptg.eventbrite.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kennelson11 at gmail.com Thu Aug 13 16:44:39 2020 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 09:44:39 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] vPTG October 2020 Team Signup In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Apologies for the confusion- the ethercalc I linked in the first email is the one from the previous PTG. Please use this ethercalc to signup for the October PTG: https://ethercalc.openstack.org/7xp2pcbh1ncb Sorry again for the confusion! -Kendall (diablo_rojo) On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 9:19 AM Kendall Nelson wrote: > Greetings! > > As you hopefully already know, our next PTG will be virtual again, and > held from Monday October 26th to Friday October 30th. We will have the same > schedule set up available as last time with three windows of time spread > across the day to cover all timezones with breaks in between. > > *To signup your team, you must complete **BOTH** the survey[1] AND > reserve time in the ethercalc[2] by September 11th at 7:00 UTC.* > > We ask that the PTL/SIG Chair/Team lead sign up for time to have their > discussions in with 4 rules/guidelines. > > 1. Cross project discussions (like SIGs or support project teams) should > be scheduled towards the start of the week so that any discussions that > might shape those of other teams happen first. > 2. No team should sign up for more than 4 hours per UTC day to help keep > participants actively engaged. > 3. No team should sign up for more than 16 hours across all time slots to > avoid burning out our contributors and to enable participation in multiple > teams discussions. > > Again, you need to fill out BOTH the ethercalc AND the survey to complete > your team's sign up. > > If you have any issues with signing up your team, due to conflict or > otherwise, please let me know! While we are trying to empower you to make > your own decisions as to when you meet and for how long (after all, you > know your needs and teams timezones better than we do), we are here to help! > > Once your team is signed up, please register! And remind your team to > register! Registration is free, but since it will be how we contact you > with passwords, event details, etc. it is still important! > > Continue to check back for updates at openstack.org/ptg. > > -the Kendalls (diablo_rojo & wendallkaters) > > > [1] Team Survey: > https://openstackfoundation.formstack.com/forms/june2020_virtual_ptg_survey > [2] Ethercalc Signup: https://ethercalc.openstack.org/126u8ek25noy > [3] PTG Registration: https://october2020ptg.eventbrite.com > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kennelson11 at gmail.com Thu Aug 13 17:10:22 2020 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 10:10:22 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] vPTG October 2020 Team Signup In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sigh. I guess I should have known better than to send this out without having a cup of tea first. The survey link in the original email is also from the last PTG. Please use this survey link: https://openstackfoundation.formstack.com/forms/oct2020_vptg_survey -Kendall (diablo_rojo) On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 9:44 AM Kendall Nelson wrote: > Apologies for the confusion- the ethercalc I linked in the first email is > the one from the previous PTG. Please use this ethercalc to signup for the > October PTG: > > https://ethercalc.openstack.org/7xp2pcbh1ncb > > Sorry again for the confusion! > > -Kendall (diablo_rojo) > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 9:19 AM Kendall Nelson > wrote: > >> Greetings! >> >> As you hopefully already know, our next PTG will be virtual again, and >> held from Monday October 26th to Friday October 30th. We will have the same >> schedule set up available as last time with three windows of time spread >> across the day to cover all timezones with breaks in between. >> >> *To signup your team, you must complete **BOTH** the survey[1] AND >> reserve time in the ethercalc[2] by September 11th at 7:00 UTC.* >> >> We ask that the PTL/SIG Chair/Team lead sign up for time to have their >> discussions in with 4 rules/guidelines. >> >> 1. Cross project discussions (like SIGs or support project teams) should >> be scheduled towards the start of the week so that any discussions that >> might shape those of other teams happen first. >> 2. No team should sign up for more than 4 hours per UTC day to help keep >> participants actively engaged. >> 3. No team should sign up for more than 16 hours across all time slots to >> avoid burning out our contributors and to enable participation in multiple >> teams discussions. >> >> Again, you need to fill out BOTH the ethercalc AND the survey to complete >> your team's sign up. >> >> If you have any issues with signing up your team, due to conflict or >> otherwise, please let me know! While we are trying to empower you to make >> your own decisions as to when you meet and for how long (after all, you >> know your needs and teams timezones better than we do), we are here to help! >> >> Once your team is signed up, please register! And remind your team to >> register! Registration is free, but since it will be how we contact you >> with passwords, event details, etc. it is still important! >> >> Continue to check back for updates at openstack.org/ptg. >> >> -the Kendalls (diablo_rojo & wendallkaters) >> >> >> [1] Team Survey: >> https://openstackfoundation.formstack.com/forms/june2020_virtual_ptg_survey >> [2] Ethercalc Signup: https://ethercalc.openstack.org/126u8ek25noy >> [3] PTG Registration: https://october2020ptg.eventbrite.com >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrew.bays at gmail.com Thu Aug 13 18:50:45 2020 From: andrew.bays at gmail.com (Andrew Bays) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:50:45 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Stx-Openstack Install Message-ID: Greetings, I hope you all are well. I have two virtualized Starling-X distributed cloud deployments (both which consist of 2 VMs for AIO HA central cloud and 2 VMs for AIO HA subcloud). One is version 3.0 and the other is 4.0. Both were created/installed following the official documentation: - https://docs.starlingx.io/deploy_install_guides/r3_release/distributed_cloud/index.html - https://docs.starlingx.io/deploy_install_guides/r3_release/openstack/install.html - https://docs.starlingx.io/deploy_install_guides/r4_release/distributed_cloud/index.html - https://docs.starlingx.io/deploy_install_guides/r4_release/openstack/install.html My 3.0 deployment has both k8s and Openstack running on the central and subcloud clouds. I didn't have any luck with stx-openstack version 1.0-9 "latest" stable at first, so I tried "versioned" , which ended up working for me. However, once I set my subcloud to "managed" in the central cloud with dcmanager, I never saw the Openstack identity sync status reach "in-sync", even after waiting a long time: [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ dcmanager subcloud show subcloud2 > +--------------------------------+----------------------------+ > | Field | Value | > +--------------------------------+----------------------------+ > | id | 8 | > | name | subcloud2 | > ... > | software_version | 19.12 | > | management | managed | > | availability | online | > | deploy_status | complete | > ... > | identity_sync_status | in-sync | > | identity_openstack_sync_status | unknown | > | patching_sync_status | in-sync | > | platform_sync_status | in-sync | > +--------------------------------+----------------------------+ > Could anyone provide guidance on where to look in terms of pods, services, logs, etc, such that I might find a clue as to what the problem might be? Am I possibly missing configuration or some other required step to enable the sync (beyond just setting the subcloud to "managed")? For my 4.0 distributed cloud, I can't even get stx-openstack 1-0.49 ( "latest" or "versioned" ) to install. The keystone-api-proxy pod fails with the following error in its logs: $ kubectl logs pods/keystone-api-proxy-f > + dcorch-api-proxy --config-file=/etc/dcorch/dcorch.conf --type identity > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/var/lib/openstack/bin/dcorch-api-proxy", line 5, in > from dcorch.cmd.api_proxy import main > File > "/var/lib/openstack/lib/python2.7/site-packages/dcorch/cmd/api_proxy.py", > line 42, in > from dcorch.api.proxy.common import utils > File > "/var/lib/openstack/lib/python2.7/site-packages/dcorch/api/proxy/common/utils.py", > line 26, in > from dccommon.drivers.openstack import sdk_platform as sdk > File > "/var/lib/openstack/lib/python2.7/site-packages/dccommon/drivers/openstack/sdk_platform.py", > line 26, in > from dccommon.drivers.openstack.barbican import BarbicanClient > File > "/var/lib/openstack/lib/python2.7/site-packages/dccommon/drivers/openstack/barbican.py", > line 23, in > from barbicanclient import client > *ImportError: No module named barbicanclient* > Has anyone else encountered this issue or know how to fix/work-around it? It seems like some dependency is missing from the container image, but I'm not sure. Any insights/feedback on these two issues would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Regards, Andrew -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Frank.Miller at windriver.com Thu Aug 13 20:07:08 2020 From: Frank.Miller at windriver.com (Miller, Frank) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 20:07:08 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules from June build? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Zhipeng: Please suggest a solution to this issue. One option is to back out the commit that introduced this issue. Can you identify a solution that doesn't require you to back out your commit? Frank From: Khalil, Ghada Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 10:06 PM To: Penney, Don ; 'starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io' ; Liu, ZhipengS (zhipengs.liu at intel.com) ; Miller, Frank Subject: RE: [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules from June build? The launchpad is: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1891416 From: Penney, Don > Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 9:21 PM To: 'starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io' >; Liu, ZhipengS (zhipengs.liu at intel.com) >; Miller, Frank > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules from June build? Hi folks, It was discovered that the recent stx-platformclients image was not picking up recent changes made to the distributedcloud-client package (I believe a Launchpad will be raised shortly). Tracing back through the CENGN build logs, the problem appears to stem from the changes introduced by: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737456/11/build-tools/build-docker-images/docker-image-build.cfg So for specific images, including stx-platformclients, the image build is now using a reference to a presumably static tarball: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/stx-centos-py2_stable-wheels.tar Looking at the dir listing, we can see this tarball is dated June 23rd: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/ What this means is that these particular images will be using this locked tarball for installing python modules from the wheels (ie. The PIP_PACKAGES list)... which means that an image like stx-platformclients, which is getting various starlingx clients from wheels, will only ever have content from that June 23rd build. Was this the intended behavior? Instead of this "alternate wheels tarball", shouldn't we be generating a wheels tarball with both py2 and py3 support, as long as we're building any py2 images? Thanks, Don. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sgw at linux.intel.com Thu Aug 13 20:18:47 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 13:18:47 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules from June build? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5c73943d-974b-86c8-0896-b0d88f9be6e2@linux.intel.com> Another important question is does this affect the 4.0.1 release? If we are using a static tarball from mid-June and we released in early August, are there changes that were missed? Sau! On 8/13/20 1:07 PM, Miller, Frank wrote: > Zhipeng: > > Please suggest a solution to this issue.  One option is to back out the > commit that introduced this issue.  Can you identify a solution that > doesn’t require you to back out your commit? > > Frank > > *From:* Khalil, Ghada > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 12, 2020 10:06 PM > *To:* Penney, Don ; > 'starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io' > ; Liu, ZhipengS > (zhipengs.liu at intel.com) ; Miller, Frank > > *Subject:* RE: [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules > from June build? > > The launchpad is: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1891416 > > *From:* Penney, Don > > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 12, 2020 9:21 PM > *To:* 'starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io' > >; Liu, ZhipengS > (zhipengs.liu at intel.com ) > >; Miller, Frank > > > *Subject:* [Starlingx-discuss] [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to > python modules from June build? > > Hi folks, > > It was discovered that the recent stx-platformclients image was not > picking up recent changes made to the distributedcloud-client package (I > believe a Launchpad will be raised shortly). Tracing back through the > CENGN build logs, the problem appears to stem from the changes > introduced by: > > https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737456/11/build-tools/build-docker-images/docker-image-build.cfg > > So for specific images, including stx-platformclients, the image build > is now using a reference to a presumably static tarball: > > http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/stx-centos-py2_stable-wheels.tar > > Looking at the dir listing, we can see this tarball is dated June 23^rd : > > http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/ > > What this means is that these particular images will be using this > locked tarball for installing python modules from the wheels (ie. The > PIP_PACKAGES list)… which means that an image like stx-platformclients, > which is getting various starlingx clients from wheels, will only ever > have content from that June 23^rd build. > > Was this the intended behavior? Instead of this “alternate wheels > tarball”, shouldn’t we be generating a wheels tarball with both py2 and > py3 support, as long as we’re building any py2 images? > > Thanks, > > Don. > > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss > From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Thu Aug 13 20:41:13 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 20:41:13 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Pending cherry-picks for stx.3.0.1 Message-ID: Hi Folks, We would like to build the stx.3.0.1 maintenance release in the week of Aug 24. There are currently 6 launchpads that still need to be cherry-picked back to the r/stx.3.0 branch for this, below. If you're the owner of one of these bugs, please plan to cherry-pick the fix by end of next week (Friday, Aug 21). Thanks, Bill... - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1854169 (Stefan) Backup & Restore: AIO-DX+worker Controller failed to become active after restore - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855474 (Yong) OpenStack pods were not recovered after force reboot active controller - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856064 (Paul V) Active controller became degraded after lock/unlock compute node - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1863957 (Don) CENGN build failure, stx-nova and stx-neutron images - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855319 (Mingyuan) [ironic] pod ironic-manage-cleaning-network failing after helm override - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856209 (Bob) System config failed by Server died: listen tcp :44134: bind: address already in use -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bnovickovs at weecodelab.com Thu Aug 13 22:05:03 2020 From: bnovickovs at weecodelab.com (bnovickovs at weecodelab.com) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 23:05:03 +0100 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] No tenant network is available for allocation. - Openstack Message-ID: <4fde6828fbbc429adcfb4b19d560f58c@weecodelab.com> Hi, I ve deployed Starlingx 4.0 Openstack for testing purposes. Created external flat-physnet0 network which is working fine. I can ping router assigned with that external network. Thus, I tried to create tenant network in Project tab (Horizon UI) and got an error - Error: Failed to create network "sfasfsaf": Unable to create the network. No tenant network is available for allocation. Neutron server returns request_ids: ['req-775f279d-ff44-4830-b8dd-e49559289ee5']; Then, I opened admin tab and created Vxlan private network and assigned it to the router. However, when I create an instance, private IP address is not assigned to it. If I turn off DHCP in that private network, instance is not even loading. Any suggestions on that? P.S. I have only one DATA interface for my setup with physnet0 assigned to it. Thank you and regards From Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com Fri Aug 14 00:48:07 2020 From: Ghada.Khalil at windriver.com (Khalil, Ghada) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 00:48:07 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Minutes: StarlingX Release Meeting - Aug 13/2020 Message-ID: Agenda/Minutes are posted at: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-releases stx.3.0.1 - r/stx.3.0 Branch - https://review.opendev.org/#/q/projects:+starlingx+branch:r/stx.3.0 - LPs that need to be cherrypicked to the r/stx.3.0 branch before we rebuild - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1854169 (Stefan) Backup & Restore: AIO-DX+worker Controller failed to become active after restore - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855474 (Yong) OpenStack pods were not recovered after force reboot active controller - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856064 (Paul V) Active controller became degraded after lock/unlock compute node - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1863957 (Don) CENGN build failure, stx-nova and stx-neutron images - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855319 (Mingyuan) [ironic] pod ironic-manage-cleaning-network failing after helm override - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856209 (Bob) System config failed by Server died: listen tcp :44134: bind: address already in use - Bill to send an email to the mailing list to cherrypick these items to the branch. Deadline: August 21 - Start the RC build the week of August 24 - request to Davlet Issue with docker image builds - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1891416 - Needs attention from the build team and Zhipeng - What is the impact of stx.4.0? - Expect that this is not an immediate issue for stx.4.0 as the platformclients image was tagged prior to 4.0 final compile - This will be an issue in the future if code is ported to r/stx.4.0 that updates system/dcmanager CLIs. stx.4.0 - Agreed to do a release retrospective with the community. Bill to send a heads up to the mailing list. - Notes - Release was ~4wks later than initially planned - Long Poles - Openstack Rebase - Layered build transition - Do we increase the LAG between the stx release and the openstack release? - Do we skip openstack rebases? Likely would cause other problems - Do we release more frequently? - This will cause an impact to the user community - Preliminary input related to openstack rebase: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/stx-openstack-rebase stx.5.0 - Started a new release folder - https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1b7Ogqpxsgh4h-Wof-5fyY6vpqJhrK_ll - Need to define the milestone dates - Use input from stx.4.0 community retrospective - StoryBoards Already Tagged for stx.5.0 - https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/list?status=active&project_group_id=86&tags=stx.5.0 From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Fri Aug 14 04:49:33 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 04:49:33 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200814T013421Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-14 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200814T013421Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: RED Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200814T013421Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz Reason: wrong cert-manager version. Error: 07:33:50 [2020-08-14T04:33:50.912Z] fatal: [localhost]: FAILED! => {"changed": false, "msg": "/usr/local/share/applications/helm/cert-manager-1.0-5.tgz doesn't exist"} There exist an older bug opened for a similar issue: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1886742 The version of cert-manager found in /usr/local/share/applications/helm/ is 1.0-6. Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 20513 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From pvmpublic at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 10:31:08 2020 From: pvmpublic at gmail.com (Pratik M.) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 16:01:08 +0530 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Debugging operational state disabled Message-ID: Hi I have a R3.0 AIO-DX cluster. I have been able to get into a state twice where I try some cluster-wide config change, do a lock and unlock of controller-1 and it ends up being operational=disabled. A force lock-unlock or reboot does not help. I have hit this twice: 1. Moving OAM_IF to a bonded interface 2. Trying to add OVS-DPDK. I did this (appx): system modify --vswitch_type ovs-dpdk system host-lock controller-1 system host-cpu-modify -f vswitch -p0 1 controller-1 system host-memory-modify -f vswitch -1G 1 controller-1 0 system host-memory-modify -f vswitch -1G 1 controller-1 1 system host-memory-modify controller-1 0 -1G 10 system host-memory-modify controller-1 1 -1G 10 system host-unlock controller-1 I was then planning to do swact from controller-0 and repeat the steps. But I end up with controller-1 as disabled. I have a couple of pods in CrashLoopBackOff, and error logs w/ ovs-ofctl complaining about interfaces that do not exist. https://gist.github.com/pvmpublic/2f9a7180a5aef59de09aac9877302720 How do I debug this? Thanks in advance Pratik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Volker.Hoesslin at swsn.de Fri Aug 14 12:10:32 2020 From: Volker.Hoesslin at swsn.de (von Hoesslin, Volker) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 12:10:32 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] =?iso-8859-1?q?=5BURL_wurde_ver=E4ndert=5D__D?= =?iso-8859-1?q?ebugging_operational_state_disabled?= In-Reply-To: <2id8pq01ebq916jq@shdsegapp2> References: <2id8pq01ebq916jq@shdsegapp2> Message-ID: <0e9181e605cb428e9b0e70a759c632b5@swsn.de> hi, after an power outage my server tells me similar problems... I am curious what kind of answers will come ;) volker... ________________________________ Von: Pratik M. Gesendet: Freitag, 14. August 2020 12:31:08 An: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Betreff: [URL wurde verändert] [Starlingx-discuss] Debugging operational state disabled Externe E-Mail! Öffnen Sie nur Links oder Anhänge von vertrauenswürdigen Absendern! Hi I have a R3.0 AIO-DX cluster. I have been able to get into a state twice where I try some cluster-wide config change, do a lock and unlock of controller-1 and it ends up being operational=disabled. A force lock-unlock or reboot does not help. I have hit this twice: 1. Moving OAM_IF to a bonded interface 2. Trying to add OVS-DPDK. I did this (appx): system modify --vswitch_type ovs-dpdk system host-lock controller-1 system host-cpu-modify -f vswitch -p0 1 controller-1 system host-memory-modify -f vswitch -1G 1 controller-1 0 system host-memory-modify -f vswitch -1G 1 controller-1 1 system host-memory-modify controller-1 0 -1G 10 system host-memory-modify controller-1 1 -1G 10 system host-unlock controller-1 I was then planning to do swact from controller-0 and repeat the steps. But I end up with controller-1 as disabled. I have a couple of pods in CrashLoopBackOff, and error logs w/ ovs-ofctl complaining about interfaces that do not exist. https://sis-schwerin.de/externer-link/?href=https://gist.github.com/pvmpublic/2f9a7180a5aef59de09aac9877302720 How do I debug this? Thanks in advance Pratik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zhipengs.liu at intel.com Fri Aug 14 14:47:32 2020 From: zhipengs.liu at intel.com (Liu, ZhipengS) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 14:47:32 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules from June build? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Frank and Don, This is exactly a workaround for 4 python2 base images build after I discussed with Scott and Chant in mailing list. Please see my attached email for more detail. We cannot revert this patch directly as it will block ussuri openstack image build. Chant and I also tried several solutions before, including 1. Try to find all python2 dependent wheels Need add almost all old python2 wheels and fix conflict and dependency issues. 1. Try to find wheels support both python2 and python3 Some wheels could not support both. 1. Try to build these 4 images with python3 enabled But these local packages have several local dependencies, which are all python2 based. stx-nova-api-proxy (This one can be upgraded to py3) stx-fm-rest-api stx-keystone-api-proxy stx-platformclients Thanks! Zhipeng From: Miller, Frank Sent: 2020年8月14日 4:07 To: Khalil, Ghada ; Penney, Don ; 'starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io' ; Liu, ZhipengS Subject: RE: [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules from June build? Zhipeng: Please suggest a solution to this issue. One option is to back out the commit that introduced this issue. Can you identify a solution that doesn’t require you to back out your commit? Frank From: Khalil, Ghada > Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 10:06 PM To: Penney, Don >; 'starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io' >; Liu, ZhipengS (zhipengs.liu at intel.com) >; Miller, Frank > Subject: RE: [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules from June build? The launchpad is: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1891416 From: Penney, Don > Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 9:21 PM To: 'starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io' >; Liu, ZhipengS (zhipengs.liu at intel.com) >; Miller, Frank > Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build]: py2 starlingx images locked to python modules from June build? Hi folks, It was discovered that the recent stx-platformclients image was not picking up recent changes made to the distributedcloud-client package (I believe a Launchpad will be raised shortly). Tracing back through the CENGN build logs, the problem appears to stem from the changes introduced by: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737456/11/build-tools/build-docker-images/docker-image-build.cfg So for specific images, including stx-platformclients, the image build is now using a reference to a presumably static tarball: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/stx-centos-py2_stable-wheels.tar Looking at the dir listing, we can see this tarball is dated June 23rd: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/ What this means is that these particular images will be using this locked tarball for installing python modules from the wheels (ie. The PIP_PACKAGES list)… which means that an image like stx-platformclients, which is getting various starlingx clients from wheels, will only ever have content from that June 23rd build. Was this the intended behavior? Instead of this “alternate wheels tarball”, shouldn’t we be generating a wheels tarball with both py2 and py3 support, as long as we’re building any py2 images? Thanks, Don. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Liu, ZhipengS" Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] [OpenStack Ussuri Upgrade Task] Call for patch review!! Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020 13:44:34 +0000 Size: 60806 URL: From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Fri Aug 14 16:57:20 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 16:57:20 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] stx.4.0 Release Retrospective Message-ID: Hi Folks, In yesterday's Release Team meeting [0], we agreed to do an stx.4.0 release retrospective in next week's community call [1]. Some of the potential topics we discussed are: - Release was ~4wks later than initially planned - Long Poles - Openstack Rebase - Layered build transition - Do we increase the LAG between the stx release and the openstack release? - Do we skip openstack rebases? Likely would cause other problems - Do we release more frequently? - This will cause an impact to the user community Preliminary input related to openstack rebase is in [2], please feel free to add notes/comments there on any topic related to this retrospective. Bill... [0] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/stx-releases [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/stx-status [2] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/stx-openstack-rebase From build.starlingx at gmail.com Sat Aug 15 01:52:45 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 21:52:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_flock_master_master - Build # 213 - Failure! Message-ID: <471472128.2102.1597456366595.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_layer_flock_master_master Build #: 213 Status: Failure Timestamp: 20200815T013427Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200815T013427Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters FULL_BUILD: false FORCE_BUILD: false From build.starlingx at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 01:52:42 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2020 21:52:42 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_flock_master_master - Build # 214 - Still Failing! In-Reply-To: <1316023648.2100.1597456364212.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> References: <1316023648.2100.1597456364212.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: <195234917.2107.1597542763267.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_layer_flock_master_master Build #: 214 Status: Still Failing Timestamp: 20200816T013420Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200816T013420Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters FULL_BUILD: false FORCE_BUILD: false From build.starlingx at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 23:22:00 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2020 19:22:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_flock_master_master - Build # 215 - Still Failing! In-Reply-To: <672984134.2105.1597542761511.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> References: <672984134.2105.1597542761511.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: <510352988.2115.1597620120838.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_layer_flock_master_master Build #: 215 Status: Still Failing Timestamp: 20200816T230413Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200816T230413Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters FULL_BUILD: false FORCE_BUILD: false From pvmpublic at gmail.com Mon Aug 17 10:43:56 2020 From: pvmpublic at gmail.com (Pratik M.) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 16:13:56 +0530 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] bnx2x driver panic. Is source same as CentOS 7? In-Reply-To: References: <2dc146c6-aac5-cd00-2b10-0984af564104@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:46 PM Pratik M. wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 8:56 PM Saul Wold wrote: > [...] > > Can you try installing from the master ISO to see if the 4.18 kernel > > addresses these panics? > > Sure, I will try and update. Hi, As an update, I tried using R4.0, but that didn't work. Is it because the initrd does not have the necessary firmware? https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1891876 Thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From build.starlingx at gmail.com Mon Aug 17 11:52:53 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:52:53 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [stable] [build-report] STX_build_docker_images - Build # 264 - Failure! Message-ID: <25809411.2119.1597665173637.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_docker_images Build #: 264 Status: Failure Timestamp: 20200817T114501Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters BRANCH: master MY_WORKSPACE: /localdisk/loadbuild/jenkins/master/20200817T043013Z OS: centos MUNGED_BRANCH: master MY_REPO: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master/cgcs-root PUBLISH_LOGS_URL: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs MASTER_BUILD_NUMBER: 645 PUBLISH_LOGS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs MASTER_JOB_NAME: STX_build_master_master MY_REPO_ROOT: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master PUBLISH_DISTRO_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic PUBLISH_TIMESTAMP: 20200817T043013Z DOCKER_BUILD_ID: jenkins-master-20200817T043013Z-builder TIMESTAMP: 20200817T043013Z OS_VERSION: 7.5.1804 BUILD_STREAM: stable PUBLISH_INPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/inputs LAYER: PUBLISH_OUTPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/outputs From build.starlingx at gmail.com Mon Aug 17 11:52:55 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:52:55 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_master_master - Build # 645 - Failure! Message-ID: <542178946.2122.1597665176207.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_master_master Build #: 645 Status: Failure Timestamp: 20200817T043013Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters BUILD_CONTAINERS_DEV: false BUILD_CONTAINERS_STABLE: false FORCE_BUILD: true From Frank.Miller at windriver.com Mon Aug 17 13:32:57 2020 From: Frank.Miller at windriver.com (Miller, Frank) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 13:32:57 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] No STX containerization meeting on August 18 Message-ID: StarlingX Community: There is no need for a meeting this week. Cancelling. If there are any questions or topics please use the mailing list. Frank -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sgw at linux.intel.com Mon Aug 17 14:46:35 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:46:35 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [stable] [build-report] STX_build_docker_images - Build # 264 - Failure! In-Reply-To: <25809411.2119.1597665173637.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> References: <25809411.2119.1597665173637.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: <37009a80-1ae4-419e-8df3-470c8dc3faf7@linux.intel.com> Anyone know what's going on with the build machine? The logs are showing that build.starlingx.cengn.ca is unreachable. I tried to ping it from here and get no response. It does resolve to an IP from my end. Is someone already looking into this? > > Determining fastest mirrors > http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80//mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/outputs/RPMS/std/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" > Trying other mirror. > http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80//mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/inputs/RPMS/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" > Trying other mirror. > http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80/mirror/centos/download.ceph.com/rpm-mimic/el7/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" > Trying other mirror. > http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80/mirror/centos/centos/mirror.centos.org/centos/7/sclo/x86_64/rh/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" > Trying other mirror. > No packages marked for update On 8/17/20 4:52 AM, build.starlingx at gmail.com wrote: > Project: STX_build_docker_images > Build #: 264 > Status: Failure > Timestamp: 20200817T114501Z > > Check logs at: > http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Parameters > > BRANCH: master > MY_WORKSPACE: /localdisk/loadbuild/jenkins/master/20200817T043013Z > OS: centos > MUNGED_BRANCH: master > MY_REPO: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master/cgcs-root > PUBLISH_LOGS_URL: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs > MASTER_BUILD_NUMBER: 645 > PUBLISH_LOGS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs > MASTER_JOB_NAME: STX_build_master_master > MY_REPO_ROOT: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master > PUBLISH_DISTRO_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic > PUBLISH_TIMESTAMP: 20200817T043013Z > DOCKER_BUILD_ID: jenkins-master-20200817T043013Z-builder > TIMESTAMP: 20200817T043013Z > OS_VERSION: 7.5.1804 > BUILD_STREAM: stable > PUBLISH_INPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/inputs > LAYER: > PUBLISH_OUTPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/outputs > > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss > From Sabeel.Ansari at windriver.com Mon Aug 17 14:58:35 2020 From: Sabeel.Ansari at windriver.com (Ansari, Sabeel) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 14:58:35 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200814T013421Z In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Fix has been committed to update the cert-manager version in https://review.opendev.org/#/c/746513/ Thanks Sabeel From: Dimofte, Alexandru Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 12:50 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200814T013421Z Sanity Test from 2020-August-14 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200814T013421Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: RED Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200814T013421Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz Reason: wrong cert-manager version. Error: 07:33:50 [2020-08-14T04:33:50.912Z] fatal: [localhost]: FAILED! => {"changed": false, "msg": "/usr/local/share/applications/helm/cert-manager-1.0-5.tgz doesn't exist"} There exist an older bug opened for a similar issue: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1886742 The version of cert-manager found in /usr/local/share/applications/helm/ is 1.0-6. Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 15503 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From scott.little at windriver.com Mon Aug 17 16:14:45 2020 From: scott.little at windriver.com (Scott Little) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 12:14:45 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Important: DockerHub Updates it's Terms of Service Message-ID: <745e217c-f91f-8eb0-6654-ccdc5a9e6332@windriver.com> Dockerhub will be implemented a 6 month image retention limit on it's free accounts starting November first.  StarlingX have been using the free service up till now, so this applies to us. Reading their Container Image Retention Policy FAQ , it looks like it's 6 months of inactivity, rather than 6 month since creation.  I don't think the risk is terribly high, but we may want to look into a payed plan as insurance. Scott Little -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fungi at yuggoth.org Mon Aug 17 16:29:05 2020 From: fungi at yuggoth.org (Jeremy Stanley) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 16:29:05 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Important: DockerHub Updates it's Terms of Service In-Reply-To: <745e217c-f91f-8eb0-6654-ccdc5a9e6332@windriver.com> References: <745e217c-f91f-8eb0-6654-ccdc5a9e6332@windriver.com> Message-ID: <20200817162905.q6snpperr2nmo427@yuggoth.org> On 2020-08-17 12:14:45 -0400 (-0400), Scott Little wrote: > Dockerhub will be implemented a 6 month image retention limit on it's free > accounts starting November first.  StarlingX have been using the free > service up till now, so this applies to us. > > Reading their Container Image Retention Policy FAQ > , it looks like it's > 6 months of inactivity, rather than 6 month since creation.  I > don't think the risk is terribly high, but we may want to look > into a payed plan as > insurance. It looks like if there are any images you want to ensure continue to survive published on DockerHub, you just need something/someone to pull a copy of them at least every 6 months (for example, via a periodic CI job or even cron running somewhere). Also making sure your contact address for the namespace on DH is correct and goes to someone who will notice the pending deletion notifications will help, as will checking the DH dashboard occasionally to see the status of those images. -- Jeremy Stanley -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 963 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kennelson11 at gmail.com Mon Aug 17 20:44:22 2020 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 13:44:22 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Forum Brainstorming Message-ID: Hello Everyone! The Virtual Forum is approaching. We would love 1 volunteer from the community for the Forum Selection Committee. Ideally, the volunteer would already be serving in some capacity in a governance role for your project. In addition to calling for volunteers for the Forum selection committee, this email kicks off the brainstorming period before the CFP tool opens for formal Forum submissions. The categories for brainstorming etherpads have already been setup here[1]. Please add your etherpads and ideas there! The CFP tool will open on August 31st and will close September 14th. For information on the upcoming virtual Summit[2]. For more information on the Forum[3]. Please reach out to jimmy at openstack.org or knelson at openstack.org if you're interested. Volunteers should respond on or before August 31, 2020. Thanks! Kendall (diablo_rojo) [1] Virtual Forum 2020 Wiki: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Virtual2020 [2] Virtual Open Infra Summit Site: https://www.openstack.org/summit/2020 [3] General Forum Wiki: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Don.Penney at windriver.com Mon Aug 17 21:42:35 2020 From: Don.Penney at windriver.com (Penney, Don) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 21:42:35 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] bnx2x driver panic. Is source same as CentOS 7? In-Reply-To: References: <2dc146c6-aac5-cd00-2b10-0984af564104@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: Firmware isn’t my area, but we don’t have bnx2x-bnxZ2x-e2-7.13.11.0.fw in our load at all. We are currently including linux-firmware-20190429-72.gitddde598.el7.noarch.rpm in our system: https://opendev.org/starlingx/tools/src/commit/e390e85bd5f079d827bfabb69208cd12ec4de02e/centos-mirror-tools/config/centos/flock/rpms_centos.lst#L536 The closest it has to what you’re looking for is: /usr/lib/firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e1-7.13.11.0.fw /usr/lib/firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e1h-7.13.11.0.fw /usr/lib/firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e2-7.13.11.0.fw I see nothing with bnxZ2x. We don’t currently update the initrd or squashfs (installer rootfs) with the linux-firmware RPM, so we just have what’s in the stock installer images. The initrd only has a handful of firmware images, while the squashfs.img appears to have a slightly older version of the linux-firmware RPM content (missing the 7.13.11.0 images listed above). If the firmware you need is in a newer version of the linux-firmware RPM, we’d need to update the rpms_centos.lst file to move to the newer version, and also update the update-pxe-network-installer utility to update the linux-firmware RPM content in the initrd.img and squashfs.img images: https://opendev.org/starlingx/root/src/branch/master/build-tools/update-pxe-network-installer Cheers, Don. From: Pratik M. Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020 6:44 AM To: Saul Wold Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] bnx2x driver panic. Is source same as CentOS 7? On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:46 PM Pratik M. > wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 8:56 PM Saul Wold > wrote: > [...] > > Can you try installing from the master ISO to see if the 4.18 kernel > > addresses these panics? > > Sure, I will try and update. Hi, As an update, I tried using R4.0, but that didn't work. Is it because the initrd does not have the necessary firmware? https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1891876 Thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scott.little at windriver.com Mon Aug 17 22:14:02 2020 From: scott.little at windriver.com (Scott Little) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 18:14:02 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [stable] [build-report] STX_build_docker_images - Build # 264 - Failure! In-Reply-To: <37009a80-1ae4-419e-8df3-470c8dc3faf7@linux.intel.com> References: <25809411.2119.1597665173637.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> <37009a80-1ae4-419e-8df3-470c8dc3faf7@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: We see the build server down as well.  I have opened a support ticket. Scott On 2020-08-17 10:46 a.m., Saul Wold wrote: > > Anyone know what's going on with the build machine? The logs are > showing that build.starlingx.cengn.ca is unreachable.  I tried to ping > it from here and get no response. It does resolve to an IP from my end. > > Is someone already looking into this? > >> >> Determining fastest mirrors >> http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80//mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/outputs/RPMS/std/repodata/repomd.xml: >> [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: >> build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" >> Trying other mirror. >> http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80//mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/inputs/RPMS/repodata/repomd.xml: >> [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: >> build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" >> Trying other mirror. >> http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80/mirror/centos/download.ceph.com/rpm-mimic/el7/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml: >> [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: >> build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" >> Trying other mirror. >> http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80/mirror/centos/centos/mirror.centos.org/centos/7/sclo/x86_64/rh/repodata/repomd.xml: >> [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: >> build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" >> Trying other mirror. >> No packages marked for update > > > > > > On 8/17/20 4:52 AM, build.starlingx at gmail.com wrote: >> Project: STX_build_docker_images >> Build #: 264 >> Status: Failure >> Timestamp: 20200817T114501Z >> >> Check logs at: >> http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Parameters >> >> BRANCH: master >> MY_WORKSPACE: /localdisk/loadbuild/jenkins/master/20200817T043013Z >> OS: centos >> MUNGED_BRANCH: master >> MY_REPO: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master/cgcs-root >> PUBLISH_LOGS_URL: >> http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs >> MASTER_BUILD_NUMBER: 645 >> PUBLISH_LOGS_BASE: >> /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs >> MASTER_JOB_NAME: STX_build_master_master >> MY_REPO_ROOT: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master >> PUBLISH_DISTRO_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic >> PUBLISH_TIMESTAMP: 20200817T043013Z >> DOCKER_BUILD_ID: jenkins-master-20200817T043013Z-builder >> TIMESTAMP: 20200817T043013Z >> OS_VERSION: 7.5.1804 >> BUILD_STREAM: stable >> PUBLISH_INPUTS_BASE: >> /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/inputs >> LAYER: >> PUBLISH_OUTPUTS_BASE: >> /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/outputs >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Starlingx-discuss mailing list >> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io >> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss >> From scott.little at windriver.com Mon Aug 17 22:19:00 2020 From: scott.little at windriver.com (Scott Little) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 18:19:00 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Saul Resigning from StarlingX TSC In-Reply-To: <259f6af1-bdad-901f-a700-257d63b4672a@linux.intel.com> References: <259f6af1-bdad-901f-a700-257d63b4672a@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <8f791267-bbc0-e121-3e77-46782e2c3a46@windriver.com> Your leadership and knowledge of the open source community will be missed. Best wishes on your future endeavors. Scott On 2020-08-12 10:29 a.m., Saul Wold wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > I am departing from Intel and also from the StarlingX project, > therefore I am resigning from the TSC. > > It's been a great couple of years working on StarlingX and developing > an awesome community. I have really enjoying helping to start up the > TSC and the community. > > I can always be found in LinkedIn (Not too many Saul Wolds out there) > or by personal email: sgw at bigsur.com. > > Sau! > > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From sgw at linux.intel.com Mon Aug 17 22:19:12 2020 From: sgw at linux.intel.com (Saul Wold) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 15:19:12 -0700 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] bnx2x driver panic. Is source same as CentOS 7? In-Reply-To: References: <2dc146c6-aac5-cd00-2b10-0984af564104@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <77729dd1-700c-a2e7-c5f3-11c6ff83c0d2@linux.intel.com> Don: Thanks! I had a similar email queued up! Pratik: I have added some additional information. On 8/17/20 2:42 PM, Penney, Don wrote: > Firmware isn’t my area, but we don’t have bnx2x-bnxZ2x-e2-7.13.11.0.fw > in our load at all. We are currently including > linux-firmware-20190429-72.gitddde598.el7.noarch.rpm in our system: > > https://opendev.org/starlingx/tools/src/commit/e390e85bd5f079d827bfabb69208cd12ec4de02e/centos-mirror-tools/config/centos/flock/rpms_centos.lst#L536 > > The closest it has to what you’re looking for is: > > /usr/lib/firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e1-7.13.11.0.fw > > /usr/lib/firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e1h-7.13.11.0.fw > > /usr/lib/firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e2-7.13.11.0.fw > I think that the e2-7.13.11.0 will work. > I see nothing with bnxZ2x. > > We don’t currently update the initrd or squashfs (installer rootfs) with > the linux-firmware RPM, so we just have what’s in the stock installer > images. The initrd only has a handful of firmware images, while the > squashfs.img appears to have a slightly older version of the > linux-firmware RPM content (missing the 7.13.11.0 images listed above). > Yeah, I was looking into this also, there is the 7.13.1.0 firmware > If the firmware you need is in a newer version of the linux-firmware > RPM, we’d need to update the rpms_centos.lst file to move to the newer > version, and also update the update-pxe-network-installer utility to > update the linux-firmware RPM content in the initrd.img and squashfs.img > images: > > https://opendev.org/starlingx/root/src/branch/master/build-tools/update-pxe-network-installer > A quick starting point might be to try adding the newer firmware load into the /pxeboot/rel-20.06/installer-intel-x86-64-initrd_1.0 image on Controller-0. If I remember your trying to use this for Controller-1. We would welcome a general change that could add specified modules/firmware to the initrd.img based on what Don suggested above. Sau! > Cheers, > > Don. > > *From:* Pratik M. > *Sent:* Monday, August 17, 2020 6:44 AM > *To:* Saul Wold > *Cc:* starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > *Subject:* Re: [Starlingx-discuss] bnx2x driver panic. Is source same as > CentOS 7? > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:46 PM Pratik M. > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 8:56 PM Saul Wold > wrote: > > [...] > > > > Can you try installing from the master ISO to see if the 4.18 kernel > > > addresses these panics? > > > > Sure, I will try and update. > > Hi, > > As an update, I tried using R4.0, but that didn't work. Is it because > the initrd does not have the necessary firmware? > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1891876 > > Thanks > From build.starlingx at gmail.com Mon Aug 17 23:22:27 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 19:22:27 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_flock_master_master - Build # 216 - Still Failing! In-Reply-To: <320948416.2113.1597620119040.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> References: <320948416.2113.1597620119040.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: <593743807.2131.1597706548548.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_layer_flock_master_master Build #: 216 Status: Still Failing Timestamp: 20200817T230419Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200817T230419Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters FULL_BUILD: false FORCE_BUILD: false From austin.sun at intel.com Tue Aug 18 07:43:33 2020 From: austin.sun at intel.com (Sun, Austin) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 07:43:33 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Agenda: Weekly StarlingX non-OpenStack distro meeting, 8/19/2020 Message-ID: Hi All: Agenda for 8/19 meeting: - Stx.4.0 Release announced: - Ceph containerization: Patches Call for review: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:%22ceph+containerization%22 - Centos8: Next step and plan. - Open: If any more topic , please add into https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/stx-distro-other Thanks. BR Austin Sun. From: Sun, Austin Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 1:00 PM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Agenda: Weekly StarlingX non-OpenStack distro meeting, 8/5/2020 Hi All: Agenda for 8/5 meeting: - Ceph containerization: Document : https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+project:starlingx/docs+branch:master+topic:ceph-cluster-editorial Patches Call for review: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:%22ceph+containerization%22 - Centos8: The summary how many pkgs are not in currently ISO ---- neusoft team to provide https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1_TQwFsQSiVdsN5xWv4D3jajkmxWiJ3KV?usp=sharing - Open: Thanks. BR Austin Sun. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From haochuan.z.chen at intel.com Tue Aug 18 11:36:21 2020 From: haochuan.z.chen at intel.com (Chen, Haochuan Z) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 11:36:21 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] rook enabling status Message-ID: Hi This is rook enabling status. 1, patch status Introduce rook https://review.opendev.org/#/c/713084/ +2 https://review.opendev.org/#/c/716792/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/720637/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/726281/ +2 https://review.opendev.org/#/c/731872/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/728364/ +2 enable backup/restore for rook https://review.opendev.org/#/c/734065/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/735501/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737228/ enable migration https://review.opendev.org/#/c/739362/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/739363/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/738555/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/721765/ doc update https://review.opendev.org/#/c/724623/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/736079/ merged https://review.opendev.org/#/c/739900/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742573/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742102/ -1 2, self test case With three configuration simplex, duplex, multi-node, verify with deployment, backup and restore, migration, and after these step, reboot, shutdown , lock and unlock. 3, Bug status 1, rook-ceph app, could not re-apply and delete. Fixed will update patch today 2, backup and restore fail in some case Bug report by Neusoft, will fix later. BR! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From build.starlingx at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 11:38:41 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 07:38:41 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_publish - Build # 1486 - Failure! Message-ID: <28987880.2138.1597750721809.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_publish Build #: 1486 Status: Failure Timestamp: 20200818T113839Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200818T043009Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters MY_WORKSPACE: /localdisk/loadbuild/jenkins/master/20200818T043009Z OS: centos PUBLISH_LOGS_URL: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200818T043009Z/logs TIMESTAMP: 20200818T043009Z PUBLISH_INPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200818T043009Z/inputs PUBLISH_LOGS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200818T043009Z/logs MASTER_JOB_NAME: STX_build_master_master LAYER: PUBLISH_OUTPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200818T043009Z/outputs MY_REPO_ROOT: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master PUBLISH_DISTRO_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic From build.starlingx at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 11:38:43 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 07:38:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_master_master - Build # 646 - Still Failing! In-Reply-To: <356948306.2120.1597665174263.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> References: <356948306.2120.1597665174263.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: <1408487833.2141.1597750724170.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_master_master Build #: 646 Status: Still Failing Timestamp: 20200818T043009Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200818T043009Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters BUILD_CONTAINERS_DEV: false BUILD_CONTAINERS_STABLE: false FORCE_BUILD: true From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Tue Aug 18 13:09:15 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 13:09:15 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Pending cherry-picks for stx.3.0.1 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi all, reminder of this. These bugs are still pending to be cherry-picked to r/stx.3.0, or an explanation as to why it's not required:   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1854169 (Stefan) Backup & Restore: AIO-DX+worker Controller failed to become active after restore   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855474 (Yong) OpenStack pods were not recovered after force reboot active controller   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856064 (Paul V) Active controller became degraded after lock/unlock compute node   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855319 (Mingyuan) [ironic] pod ironic-manage-cleaning-network failing  after helm override   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856209 (Bob) System config failed by Server died: listen tcp :44134: bind: address already in use And this query shows the current list of bugs pending cherrypick: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bugs?field.searchtext=&search=Search&field.status%3Alist=NEW&field.status%3Alist=CONFIRMED&field.status%3Alist=TRIAGED&field.status%3Alist=INPROGRESS&field.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTED&field.status%3Alist=FIXRELEASED&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITHOUT_RESPONSE&assignee_option=any&field.assignee=&field.bug_reporter=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=&field.structural_subscriber=&field.tag=stx.cherrypickneeded&field.tags_combinator=ANY&field.has_cve.used=&field.omit_dupes.used=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.affects_me.used=&field.has_patch.used=&field.has_branches.used=&field.has_branches=on&field.has_no_branches.used=&field.has_no_branches=on&field.has_blueprints.used=&field.has_blueprints=on&field.has_no_blueprints.used=&field.has_no_blueprints=on&orderby=-date_last_updated&start=0 Thanks, Bill... From: Zvonar, Bill Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 4:41 PM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Pending cherry-picks for stx.3.0.1 Hi Folks, We would like to build the stx.3.0.1 maintenance release in the week of Aug 24. There are currently 6 launchpads that still need to be cherry-picked back to the r/stx.3.0 branch for this, below. If you're the owner of one of these bugs, please plan to cherry-pick the fix by end of next week (Friday, Aug 21). Thanks, Bill...     - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1854169 (Stefan) Backup & Restore: AIO-DX+worker Controller failed to become active after restore   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855474 (Yong) OpenStack pods were not recovered after force reboot active controller   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856064 (Paul V) Active controller became degraded after lock/unlock compute node   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1863957 (Don) CENGN build failure, stx-nova and stx-neutron images   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855319 (Mingyuan) [ironic] pod ironic-manage-cleaning-network failing  after helm override   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856209 (Bob) System config failed by Server died: listen tcp :44134: bind: address already in use From zhipengs.liu at intel.com Tue Aug 18 13:57:44 2020 From: zhipengs.liu at intel.com (Liu, ZhipengS) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 13:57:44 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Pending cherry-picks for stx.3.0.1 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Bill, https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855474 (Yong) OpenStack pods were not recovered after force reboot active controller We will cherry-pick mariadb related patches after below important fix get merged on master https://review.opendev.org/#/c/744486/ Thanks! Zhipeng -----Original Message----- From: Zvonar, Bill Sent: 2020年8月18日 21:09 To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Pending cherry-picks for stx.3.0.1 Hi all, reminder of this. These bugs are still pending to be cherry-picked to r/stx.3.0, or an explanation as to why it's not required:   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1854169 (Stefan) Backup & Restore: AIO-DX+worker Controller failed to become active after restore   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855474 (Yong) OpenStack pods were not recovered after force reboot active controller   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856064 (Paul V) Active controller became degraded after lock/unlock compute node   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855319 (Mingyuan) [ironic] pod ironic-manage-cleaning-network failing  after helm override   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856209 (Bob) System config failed by Server died: listen tcp :44134: bind: address already in use And this query shows the current list of bugs pending cherrypick: https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bugs?field.searchtext=&search=Search&field.status%3Alist=NEW&field.status%3Alist=CONFIRMED&field.status%3Alist=TRIAGED&field.status%3Alist=INPROGRESS&field.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTED&field.status%3Alist=FIXRELEASED&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITHOUT_RESPONSE&assignee_option=any&field.assignee=&field.bug_reporter=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=&field.structural_subscriber=&field.tag=stx.cherrypickneeded&field.tags_combinator=ANY&field.has_cve.used=&field.omit_dupes.used=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.affects_me.used=&field.has_patch.used=&field.has_branches.used=&field.has_branches=on&field.has_no_branches.used=&field.has_no_branches=on&field.has_blueprints.used=&field.has_blueprints=on&field.has_no_blueprints.used=&field.has_no_blueprints=on&orderby=-date_last_updated&start=0 Thanks, Bill... From: Zvonar, Bill Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 4:41 PM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Pending cherry-picks for stx.3.0.1 Hi Folks, We would like to build the stx.3.0.1 maintenance release in the week of Aug 24. There are currently 6 launchpads that still need to be cherry-picked back to the r/stx.3.0 branch for this, below. If you're the owner of one of these bugs, please plan to cherry-pick the fix by end of next week (Friday, Aug 21). Thanks, Bill...     - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1854169 (Stefan) Backup & Restore: AIO-DX+worker Controller failed to become active after restore   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855474 (Yong) OpenStack pods were not recovered after force reboot active controller   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856064 (Paul V) Active controller became degraded after lock/unlock compute node   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1863957 (Don) CENGN build failure, stx-nova and stx-neutron images   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1855319 (Mingyuan) [ironic] pod ironic-manage-cleaning-network failing  after helm override   - https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1856209 (Bob) System config failed by Server died: listen tcp :44134: bind: address already in use _______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From build.starlingx at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 15:01:24 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 11:01:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_flock_master_master - Build # 217 - Still Failing! In-Reply-To: <2060742718.2129.1597706546357.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> References: <2060742718.2129.1597706546357.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: <2093480198.2149.1597762885029.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_layer_flock_master_master Build #: 217 Status: Still Failing Timestamp: 20200818T144425Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200818T144425Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters FULL_BUILD: false FORCE_BUILD: false From build.starlingx at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 16:48:00 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 12:48:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_flock_master_master - Build # 218 - Still Failing! In-Reply-To: <1322791407.2147.1597762883386.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> References: <1322791407.2147.1597762883386.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: <83612121.2154.1597769280980.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_layer_flock_master_master Build #: 218 Status: Still Failing Timestamp: 20200818T163115Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200818T163115Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters FULL_BUILD: false FORCE_BUILD: true From maryx.camp at intel.com Tue Aug 18 19:25:51 2020 From: maryx.camp at intel.com (Camp, MaryX) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 19:25:51 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Wind River Cloud Platform docs to be upstreamed into STX docs Message-ID: The StarlingX docs team is planning to upstream the Wind River Cloud Platform docs into the STX docs over the next several months. We will be submitting many Gerrit reviews and we need help from reviewers across the community, especially folks who are familiar with both products. Please look for the first group of reviews in ~2 weeks. If you're interested in more details, please join us at the STX docs meeting. We meet on Wednesdays 12:30 PST. [1] Call logistics: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings [2] Tracking Etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-documentation thanks, Mary Camp PTIGlobal Technical Writer | maryx.camp at intel.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scott.little at windriver.com Tue Aug 18 21:42:21 2020 From: scott.little at windriver.com (Scott Little) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:42:21 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [stable] [build-report] STX_build_docker_images - Build # 264 - Failure! In-Reply-To: References: <25809411.2119.1597665173637.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> <37009a80-1ae4-419e-8df3-470c8dc3faf7@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <7225d8bb-a647-9c03-a94c-1f65fc1530e0@windriver.com> The build server is back up. The shared filesystem used by the web server and build machine has been restored. I suffered a few broken builds after that, but eventually tracked down a docker virtual bridge that needed to be reconfigured to be consistent with the changes CENGN made to their network late last week. Scott On 2020-08-17 6:14 p.m., Scott Little wrote: > We see the build server down as well.  I have opened a support ticket. > > Scott > > > On 2020-08-17 10:46 a.m., Saul Wold wrote: >> >> Anyone know what's going on with the build machine? The logs are >> showing that build.starlingx.cengn.ca is unreachable.  I tried to >> ping it from here and get no response. It does resolve to an IP from >> my end. >> >> Is someone already looking into this? >> >>> >>> Determining fastest mirrors >>> http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80//mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/outputs/RPMS/std/repodata/repomd.xml: >>> [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: >>> build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" >>> Trying other mirror. >>> http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80//mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/inputs/RPMS/repodata/repomd.xml: >>> [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: >>> build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" >>> Trying other mirror. >>> http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80/mirror/centos/download.ceph.com/rpm-mimic/el7/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml: >>> [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: >>> build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" >>> Trying other mirror. >>> http://build.starlingx.cengn.ca:80/mirror/centos/centos/mirror.centos.org/centos/7/sclo/x86_64/rh/repodata/repomd.xml: >>> [Errno 14] curl#6 - "Could not resolve host: >>> build.starlingx.cengn.ca; Unknown error" >>> Trying other mirror. >>> No packages marked for update >> >> >> >> >> >> On 8/17/20 4:52 AM, build.starlingx at gmail.com wrote: >>> Project: STX_build_docker_images >>> Build #: 264 >>> Status: Failure >>> Timestamp: 20200817T114501Z >>> >>> Check logs at: >>> http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Parameters >>> >>> BRANCH: master >>> MY_WORKSPACE: /localdisk/loadbuild/jenkins/master/20200817T043013Z >>> OS: centos >>> MUNGED_BRANCH: master >>> MY_REPO: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master/cgcs-root >>> PUBLISH_LOGS_URL: >>> http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs >>> MASTER_BUILD_NUMBER: 645 >>> PUBLISH_LOGS_BASE: >>> /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/logs >>> MASTER_JOB_NAME: STX_build_master_master >>> MY_REPO_ROOT: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master >>> PUBLISH_DISTRO_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic >>> PUBLISH_TIMESTAMP: 20200817T043013Z >>> DOCKER_BUILD_ID: jenkins-master-20200817T043013Z-builder >>> TIMESTAMP: 20200817T043013Z >>> OS_VERSION: 7.5.1804 >>> BUILD_STREAM: stable >>> PUBLISH_INPUTS_BASE: >>> /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/inputs >>> LAYER: >>> PUBLISH_OUTPUTS_BASE: >>> /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200817T043013Z/outputs >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 From haochuan.z.chen at intel.com Wed Aug 19 05:40:32 2020 From: haochuan.z.chen at intel.com (Chen, Haochuan Z) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 05:40:32 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] patch review for LP188546 Message-ID: Hi Please review my patch, fix for LP188546 https://review.opendev.org/#/c/744486/ https://launchpad.net/bugs/1888546 BR! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Wed Aug 19 11:13:39 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 11:13:39 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200818T192056Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-18 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200818T192056Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200818T192056Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From Akshay.346 at hsc.com Wed Aug 19 11:16:54 2020 From: Akshay.346 at hsc.com (Akshay 346) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 11:16:54 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Ceph storage network segregation from MGMT network Message-ID: Hi Team, Hope you all are doing good. We need to segregate the Ceph storage network from the MGMT network used by starlingX so that we can attach OpenStack VMs on that network and avoid unwanted MGMT traffic being exposed to VMs. Is there any way to have a seperate network for storage (ceph) like mgmt, cluster and OAM network ? Please guide. Regards Akshay Get Outlook for iOS DISCLAIMER: This electronic message and all of its contents, contains information which is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or may have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete / destroy all copies of this electronic mail transmission without disclosing, copying, distributing, forwarding, printing or retaining any part of it. Hughes Systique accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Wed Aug 19 12:13:43 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 12:13:43 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Community (& TSC) Call (August 19, 2020) Message-ID: Hi all, reminder of the TSC/Community call coming up later today. Please feel free to add items to the agenda [0] for the community call - as a reminder, we're planning to do an stx.4.0 release retrospective today. Bill... [0] etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-status [1] call details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings#7am_PDT_.2F_1400_UTC_-_Community_Call [2] meeting start time in various time-zones: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20200819T1400 From austin.sun at intel.com Wed Aug 19 14:06:04 2020 From: austin.sun at intel.com (Sun, Austin) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 14:06:04 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] MoM: Weekly StarlingX non-OpenStack distro meeting, 8/19/2020 Message-ID: Hi All: MoM for 8/19 meeting: - Stx.4.0 Release announced - Ceph containerization: status: http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009452.html Patches Call for review: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:%22ceph+containerization%22 - Centos8: call for help status: http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-July/009227.html rpm comparation master /centos8 branch https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1_TQwFsQSiVdsN5xWv4D3jajkmxWiJ3KV?usp=sharing open patches https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:centos8+branch:f/centos8+status:open - Open: Thanks. BR Austin Sun. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Wed Aug 19 15:15:32 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 15:15:32 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Community (& TSC) Call (August 12, 2020) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >From today's meeting: * Standing Topics * Sanity * one Red sanity re: cert-manager version * will follow up offline * some build issues as well - related to CENGN maintenance activity * just need better coordination with CENGN on post-maintenance checks * Gerrit Reviews in Need of Attention * rook ceph status summary and call for patch review * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009452.html * Topics for this Week * stx.3.0 cherry-picks pending * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009455.html * Docker Updates to Terms of Service - docker images under 'free' plans is reduced to 6 months * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009443.html * AR: Build team to look into the option of manually pulling down the images periodically within a 6 month period * PTG (October 26-30) and Forum (parallel to the Summit) planning (ildikov) * PTG * Signup till September 11 * Planning etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/stx-ptg-planning-october-2020 * Forum * https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum * Brainstorming period has started * Topic submission starts August 31, ends September 14 * stx.4.0 Release Retrospective * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009433.html * Yong provided two key takeaways on https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/stx-openstack-rebase * for Victoria - 2 key improvements suggested: * settle Python3 package list first * use CENGN environment directly for container builds - launch those directly on CENGN - need to negotiate with CENGN on access * ARs from Previous Meetings * nothing this week * Open Requests for Help - we didn't get to these today * Wind River Cloud Platform docs to be upstreamed into STX docs * [Heads up - http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009459.html] added by Mary Camp * Stx-Openstack Install * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009423.html * No tenant network is available for allocation. - Openstack * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009427.html * Debugging operational state disabled * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009430.html * Ceph storage network segregation from MGMT network * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009463.html * Build Matters (if required) * nothing today -----Original Message----- From: Zvonar, Bill Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 10:26 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: RE: Community (& TSC) Call (August 12, 2020) >From today's meeting: * Standing Topics * Sanity * all green since last week * Gerrit Reviews in Need of Attention * rook ceph: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:%22ceph+containerization%22 * Topics for this Week * RC and Release Build: http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009388.html * Saul summarized the detailed steps for doing RC & Release builds - Community encouraged to review & provide feedback * it'll end up in a wiki eventually * ARs from Previous Meetings * nothing this week * Open Requests for Help * Build Packages Error * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009352.html * Saul will have a look * userspace-cni-network-plugin support in starlingx?: * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009381.html * Networking team to have a look (or maybe the Containers team?) * Build Matters (if required) * nothing this week -----Original Message----- From: Zvonar, Bill Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 8:40 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Community (& TSC) Call (August 12, 2020) Hi all, reminder of the TSC/Community call coming up later today. Please feel free to add items to the agenda [0] for the community call. Bill... [0] etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-status [1] call details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings#7am_PDT_.2F_1400_UTC_-_Community_Call [2] meeting start time in various time-zones: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20200812T1400 From maryx.camp at intel.com Thu Aug 20 01:34:37 2020 From: maryx.camp at intel.com (Camp, MaryX) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 01:34:37 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [docs] [meeting] Docs team notes 2020-08-19 Message-ID: Hello all, Here are this week's docs team meeting minutes (short form). Details in [2]. Join us if you have interest in StarlingX docs! We meet on Wednesdays 12:30 PST.   [1]   Call logistics: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings   [2]   Tracking Etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-documentation thanks, Mary Camp ========== 2020-08-19 All -- reviews merged since last meeting: 1 All -- bug status -- 10 total Reviews in progress: Several reviews related to Rook are ready to review per discuss list message: http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009452.html Editorial updates on simplex & duplex Ceph Cluster Migration guide https://review.opendev.org/#/c/745623/ Deployment guide for rook aio-duplex deployment https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742573/ Deployment guide for rook aio-sx deployment https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742102/ Deployment guide for rook deployment https://review.opendev.org/#/c/724623/ Add backup and restore guide for rook provisioned system https://review.opendev.org/#/c/739900/ All -- Opens Can the test team be looped in to test some of our complicated procedures (ie install/deployment guides)? Greg and Mary will attend the Test meeting and ask them about it. [Next meeting 1Sept @ 8 am PDT] How are doc inputs received from the development team / community? launchpad, email on discuss, storyboard item, and email. Preference is to submit a review following contributor guidelines or launchpad. Upstreaming WR docs Team has been waiting for the script to do the dita -> rst conversion, it will be available for their testing starting tomorrow. They will select first ~6 reviews tomorrow. Planning to select a representative group of docs with tables, diagrams to see how the conversion scripts play out. We discussed which topics would be best to start with. Topics not already in the STX guides will test the conversion without getting into the reorganization effort. Possibly security, system config and mgmt, node config & mgmt. Recommend making a local clone of the repository and build the docs on your own machine. Then submit the gerrit reviews to see how that process works. Use DONT MERGE or WIP in commit message to identify the reviews. Version/tagging of STX docs Ildiko talked to Doug who was involved when STX docs were first set up. It's been a while... he suggested that we start by deciding what the docs URL should look like, for example, what will be the "release" identifier (name, number, something else?). That will help us decide how to handle the repository. Probably won't need all the structure that OpenStack manuals uses (because they pull from so many different projects). Dig into some of the OS templates, figure out where the release info gets pulled into the scripts. Use the stable branches and dig into how the OpenStack docs are working. Jimmy and Jeremy may be helpful with the URL decision also. Next steps: URL structure - decide it. Look at build jobs for the OS jobs. From haridhar.kalvala at intel.com Thu Aug 20 12:12:08 2020 From: haridhar.kalvala at intel.com (Kalvala, Haridhar) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 12:12:08 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Software Management: code pointer. Message-ID: Hello All, Can anyone please point me to the "Software Management" infrastructure module code location in repo ? Thank you, Haridhar Kalvala -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Barton.Wensley at windriver.com Thu Aug 20 12:22:11 2020 From: Barton.Wensley at windriver.com (Wensley, Barton) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 12:22:11 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Software Management: code pointer. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Software Management is quite a broad term. I would take a look at the "StarlingX Training - System Commissioning" slide package and video found in the wiki (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StarlingX) by clicking on the "Detailed Training Materials" link. That presentation describes many of the software management components and points to the code in the repos. Bart From: Kalvala, Haridhar Sent: August 20, 2020 8:12 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Software Management: code pointer. Hello All, Can anyone please point me to the "Software Management" infrastructure module code location in repo ? Thank you, Haridhar Kalvala -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Thu Aug 20 15:44:40 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 15:44:40 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200820T013429Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-20 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200820T013429Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200820T013429Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From fungi at yuggoth.org Thu Aug 20 16:01:18 2020 From: fungi at yuggoth.org (Jeremy Stanley) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 16:01:18 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [docs] [meeting] Docs team notes 2020-08-19 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20200820160118.ilnaqgukaqh2oraj@yuggoth.org> On 2020-08-20 01:34:37 +0000 (+0000), Camp, MaryX wrote: [...] > Version/tagging of STX docs > Ildiko talked to Doug who was involved when STX docs were first > set up. It's been a while... he suggested that we start by > deciding what the docs URL should look like, for example, what > will be the "release" identifier (name, number, something > else?). That will help us decide how to handle the repository. > Probably won't need all the structure that OpenStack manuals > uses (because they pull from so many different projects). Dig > into some of the OS templates, figure out where the release > info gets pulled into the scripts. Use the stable branches and > dig into how the OpenStack docs are working. > > Jimmy and Jeremy may be helpful with the URL decision also. > > Next steps: URL structure - decide it. Look at build jobs for > the OS jobs. [...] I looked closer at these some last week. In OpenStack this is done two different ways... The central repository for the main https://docs.openstack.org/ site is "branchless" (from a Git perspective) and maintains parallel directory trees for the various releases: https://opendev.org/openstack/openstack-manuals/src/branch/master/www The project-specific documentation such as https://docs.openstack.org/nova/ussuri/admin/ is embedded within the project repositories and so it branches along with them: https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/stable/ussuri/doc/source/admin I would say this is really the first question to answer when it comes to designing your publication pipeline. I gather you plan to keep a single, central documentation repository for now; do you want a repository branch for each version of the documentation or to keep the various versions in different directories within a single branch? The answer to this will determine how your publication jobs need to work (whether they build all versions each time they're updated and then redeploy the entire site, or build only the version which is being modified and then deploy just that part of the site). We've basically solved this both ways, so can fairly easily support either option. -- Jeremy Stanley -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 963 bytes Desc: not available URL: From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Fri Aug 21 11:01:25 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 11:01:25 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200821T020457Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-21 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200821T020457Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200821T020457Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From Barton.Wensley at windriver.com Fri Aug 21 11:33:37 2020 From: Barton.Wensley at windriver.com (Wensley, Barton) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 11:33:37 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Software Management: code pointer. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Haridhar, OK - so you want to know about patching and upgrades then: * The use of patching is described here: https://docs.starlingx.io/developer_resources/starlingx_patching.html. The code for patching is found in the update repo in the cgcs-patch directory. * The best overview of upgrades is in the following story: https://docs.starlingx.io/specs/specs/stx-4.0/approved/starlingx-2007403-platform-upgrades.html. The code for upgrades is found in the config repo - mostly under the controllerconfig and sysinv directories but it spread out quite a bit. * The best overview of kubernetes upgrades is in the following story: https://docs.starlingx.io/specs/specs/stx-4.0/approved/containerization-2006781-kubernetes-upgrades.html. The code for kubernetes upgrades is found in the config repo - mostly under the sysinv directory. Bart From: Kalvala, Haridhar Sent: August 21, 2020 1:21 AM To: Wensley, Barton Subject: RE: Software Management: code pointer. Hi Bart, I am looking for manageability part as below. Can you please mention which part/which Video presentation has this details ? * Software Management: Support for managing software updates to all layers of software in the solution; this includes kernel, operating system, open-source packages, StarlingX, and Kubernetes. Thanks, Haridhar Kalvala From: Wensley, Barton > Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2020 5:52 PM To: Kalvala, Haridhar >; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: RE: Software Management: code pointer. Software Management is quite a broad term. I would take a look at the "StarlingX Training - System Commissioning" slide package and video found in the wiki (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StarlingX) by clicking on the "Detailed Training Materials" link. That presentation describes many of the software management components and points to the code in the repos. Bart From: Kalvala, Haridhar > Sent: August 20, 2020 8:12 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Software Management: code pointer. Hello All, Can anyone please point me to the "Software Management" infrastructure module code location in repo ? Thank you, Haridhar Kalvala -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Sat Aug 22 19:30:02 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2020 19:30:02 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200822T013923Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-22 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200822T013923Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200822T013923Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From terbroker at gmail.com Mon Aug 24 07:05:47 2020 From: terbroker at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Thomas_R=C3=B6der?=) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 09:05:47 +0200 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Which RC file to source? Message-ID: Hi I installed the first controller node VM on virtualbox (virtual standard) following the documentation by using the latest bootimage.iso. Password changed for sysadmin. But now I stuck with using 'system'. It requires to source an RC file ... but which one to use? KR -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zhipengs.liu at intel.com Mon Aug 24 07:20:16 2020 From: zhipengs.liu at intel.com (Liu, ZhipengS) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 07:20:16 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Which RC file to source? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ~$ source /etc/platform/openrc From: Thomas Röder Sent: 2020年8月24日 15:06 To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Which RC file to source? Hi I installed the first controller node VM on virtualbox (virtual standard) following the documentation by using the latest bootimage.iso. Password changed for sysadmin. But now I stuck with using 'system'. It requires to source an RC file ... but which one to use? KR -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From terbroker at gmail.com Mon Aug 24 14:40:50 2020 From: terbroker at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Thomas_R=C3=B6der?=) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 16:40:50 +0200 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Storage Node Config Message-ID: Hi I'm trying to configure the storage nodes using the Shell Scripts from the documentation (system host-store-add ). There are 2 storage nodes. The output tells that there is only one storage monitor available but at least 2 are required. So no disks are added. Ceph-mon-list shows that controller-0, controller-1 and storage-0 are configured as monitors, but storage-1 is not. Unlocking the storage nodes is also not posdible without configured volumes. How can I make it work? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yong.hu at intel.com Mon Aug 24 14:42:25 2020 From: yong.hu at intel.com (Hu, Yong) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:42:25 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Canceled: StarlingX Distro-OpenStack: Bi-weekly Project Meeting Message-ID: Cancel this session since we don’t have any topics. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/calendar Size: 3690 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Frank.Miller at windriver.com Tue Aug 25 01:02:32 2020 From: Frank.Miller at windriver.com (Miller, Frank) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 01:02:32 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Tuesday Build meeting cancelled this week Message-ID: FYI - the weekly build meeting is cancelled this week. Please use the mailing list if you have any build related topics to discuss. Frank -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From build.starlingx at gmail.com Tue Aug 25 03:25:16 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 23:25:16 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [stable] [build-report] STX_build_docker_flock_images - Build # 269 - Still Failing! In-Reply-To: null References: null Message-ID: <204973985.2173.1598325916820.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_docker_flock_images Build #: 269 Status: Still Failing Timestamp: 20200825T004516Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters HOST_PORT: 80 MY_WORKSPACE: /localdisk/loadbuild/jenkins/master-containers/20200825T000740Z OS: centos MY_REPO: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master-containers/cgcs-root BASE_VERSION: master-stable-20200825T000740Z PUBLISH_LOGS_URL: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/logs REGISTRY_USERID: slittlewrs HOST: build.starlingx.cengn.ca LATEST_PREFIX: master PUBLISH_LOGS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/logs PUBLISH_TIMESTAMP: 20200825T000740Z FLOCK_VERSION: master-centos-stable-20200825T000740Z PREFIX: master TIMESTAMP: 20200825T000740Z BUILD_STREAM: stable REGISTRY_ORG: starlingx PUBLISH_OUTPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/outputs REGISTRY: docker.io From build.starlingx at gmail.com Tue Aug 25 03:25:18 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 23:25:18 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [stable] [build-report] STX_build_docker_images_layered - Build # 44 - Failure! Message-ID: <1262512971.2176.1598325918807.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_docker_images_layered Build #: 44 Status: Failure Timestamp: 20200825T002640Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters BRANCH: master MY_WORKSPACE: /localdisk/loadbuild/jenkins/master-containers/20200825T000740Z OS: centos MUNGED_BRANCH: master MY_REPO: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master-containers/cgcs-root PUBLISH_LOGS_URL: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/logs MASTER_BUILD_NUMBER: 65 PUBLISH_LOGS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/logs MASTER_JOB_NAME: STX_build_layer_containers_master_master MY_REPO_ROOT: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master-containers PUBLISH_DISTRO_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers PUBLISH_TIMESTAMP: 20200825T000740Z DOCKER_BUILD_ID: jenkins-master-containers-20200825T000740Z-builder TIMESTAMP: 20200825T000740Z OS_VERSION: 7.5.1804 BUILD_STREAM: stable PUBLISH_INPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/inputs LAYER: containers PUBLISH_OUTPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/outputs From build.starlingx at gmail.com Tue Aug 25 03:25:22 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 23:25:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_containers_master_master - Build # 65 - Failure! Message-ID: <1005583075.2179.1598325925097.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_layer_containers_master_master Build #: 65 Status: Failure Timestamp: 20200825T000740Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters BUILD_CONTAINERS_DEV: false BUILD_CONTAINERS_STABLE: true FORCE_BUILD: false From Volker.Hoesslin at swsn.de Tue Aug 25 05:15:51 2020 From: Volker.Hoesslin at swsn.de (von Hoesslin, Volker) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 05:15:51 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Storage Node Config In-Reply-To: <2id8pq01ebq91777@shdsegapp2> References: <2id8pq01ebq91777@shdsegapp2> Message-ID: @yatindra, austin sounds very similar to our last session? volker. ________________________________ Von: Thomas Röder Gesendet: Montag, 24. August 2020 16:40 An: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Betreff: [Starlingx-discuss] Storage Node Config Externe E-Mail! Öffnen Sie nur Links oder Anhänge von vertrauenswürdigen Absendern! Hi I'm trying to configure the storage nodes using the Shell Scripts from the documentation (system host-store-add ). There are 2 storage nodes. The output tells that there is only one storage monitor available but at least 2 are required. So no disks are added. Ceph-mon-list shows that controller-0, controller-1 and storage-0 are configured as monitors, but storage-1 is not. Unlocking the storage nodes is also not posdible without configured volumes. How can I make it work? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Tue Aug 25 15:22:33 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 15:22:33 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200824T230419Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-24 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200824T230419Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200824T230419Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: From scott.little at windriver.com Tue Aug 25 20:27:14 2020 From: scott.little at windriver.com (Scott Little) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 16:27:14 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_containers_master_master - Build # 65 - Failure! In-Reply-To: <1005583075.2179.1598325925097.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> References: <1005583075.2179.1598325925097.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: Build was broken by this update https://review.opendev.org/#/c/730566/ When no proxies are in use the build of images with customizations fails on line ...     docker run "${PROXY_ARGS[@]}" --entrypoint /bin/bash --name ${USER}_update_img ${build_image_name} -c "${CUSTOMIZATION}" So "${PROXY_ARGS[@]}" becomes just "" which docker thinks is the image name, rather than ${build_image_name} Scott On 2020-08-24 11:25 p.m., build.starlingx at gmail.com wrote: > Project: STX_build_layer_containers_master_master > Build #: 65 > Status: Failure > Timestamp: 20200825T000740Z > > Check logs at: > http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/logs > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Parameters > > BUILD_CONTAINERS_DEV: false > BUILD_CONTAINERS_STABLE: true > FORCE_BUILD: false > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zhipengs.liu at intel.com Wed Aug 26 03:16:51 2020 From: zhipengs.liu at intel.com (Liu, ZhipengS) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 03:16:51 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_containers_master_master - Build # 65 - Failure! In-Reply-To: References: <1005583075.2179.1598325925097.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: Hi Scott, So, I need to remove “”, right? I will provide a fix. Thanks! Zhipeng From: Scott Little Sent: 2020年8月26日 4:27 To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Liu, ZhipengS Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_containers_master_master - Build # 65 - Failure! Build was broken by this update https://review.opendev.org/#/c/730566/ When no proxies are in use the build of images with customizations fails on line ... docker run "${PROXY_ARGS[@]}" --entrypoint /bin/bash --name ${USER}_update_img ${build_image_name} -c "${CUSTOMIZATION}" So "${PROXY_ARGS[@]}" becomes just "" which docker thinks is the image name, rather than ${build_image_name} Scott On 2020-08-24 11:25 p.m., build.starlingx at gmail.com wrote: Project: STX_build_layer_containers_master_master Build #: 65 Status: Failure Timestamp: 20200825T000740Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters BUILD_CONTAINERS_DEV: false BUILD_CONTAINERS_STABLE: true FORCE_BUILD: false _______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yatindra.shashi at intel.com Wed Aug 26 07:16:50 2020 From: yatindra.shashi at intel.com (Shashi, Yatindra) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 07:16:50 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Increasing size of STX docker registry (docker-distribution) Message-ID: HI All, I have Duplex Extended mode setup for stx 3.0. I am running out of space on docker registry: /dev/drbd8 16496984 15759452 39616 100% /var/lib/docker-distribution Is there any way to increase the size of the registry as we cannot really clean up the images/tags? I see the link here but don't see methods to increase size: https://docs.starlingx.io/operations/k8s_docker_reg_management.html Mit freundlichen Grüßen/ with best regards, Yatindra Shashi IoTG DE- Intel Corporation Munich, Germany P Save Paper, Go Digital :) Intel Deutschland GmbH Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Gary Kershaw Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau Registered Office: Munich Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From terbroker at gmail.com Wed Aug 26 07:46:36 2020 From: terbroker at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Thomas_R=C3=B6der?=) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 09:46:36 +0200 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Storage Node Config In-Reply-To: References: <2id8pq01ebq91777@shdsegapp2> Message-ID: Hi does a solution or WA exist or should I wait with the PoC until a fix or a new version is available? KR Tom von Hoesslin, Volker schrieb am Di., 25. Aug. 2020, 07:15: > @yatindra, austin > sounds very similar to our last session? > > volker. > > ------------------------------ > *Von:* Thomas Röder > *Gesendet:* Montag, 24. August 2020 16:40 > *An:* starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > *Betreff:* [Starlingx-discuss] Storage Node Config > > > *Externe E-Mail! Öffnen Sie nur Links oder Anhänge von vertrauenswürdigen Absendern! * > > Hi > > I'm trying to configure the storage nodes using the Shell Scripts from the > documentation (system host-store-add ). > > There are 2 storage nodes. > > The output tells that there is only one storage monitor available but at > least 2 are required. So no disks are added. Ceph-mon-list shows that > controller-0, controller-1 and storage-0 are configured as monitors, but > storage-1 is not. Unlocking the storage nodes is also not posdible without > configured volumes. How can I make it work? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Volker.Hoesslin at swsn.de Wed Aug 26 08:28:16 2020 From: Volker.Hoesslin at swsn.de (von Hoesslin, Volker) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 08:28:16 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Storage Node Config In-Reply-To: <382bkl01ebqi05fp@shdsegapp1> References: <2id8pq01ebq91777@shdsegapp2> ,<382bkl01ebqi05fp@shdsegapp1> Message-ID: ich kann dir nicht sagen was es genau war, aber austen hat ganz schön geflucht bis er mein stack so weit hatte bis es lief. versuch nochmal in der mailing-list nachzufragen. nutzt du denn STX v3 oder schon v4? ________________________________ Von: Thomas Röder Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. August 2020 09:46:36 An: von Hoesslin, Volker Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Shashi, Yatindra; Sun, Austin Betreff: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Storage Node Config Externe E-Mail! Öffnen Sie nur Links oder Anhänge von vertrauenswürdigen Absendern! Hi does a solution or WA exist or should I wait with the PoC until a fix or a new version is available? KR Tom von Hoesslin, Volker > schrieb am Di., 25. Aug. 2020, 07:15: @yatindra, austin sounds very similar to our last session? volker. ________________________________ Von: Thomas Röder > Gesendet: Montag, 24. August 2020 16:40 An: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Betreff: [Starlingx-discuss] Storage Node Config Externe E-Mail! Öffnen Sie nur Links oder Anhänge von vertrauenswürdigen Absendern! Hi I'm trying to configure the storage nodes using the Shell Scripts from the documentation (system host-store-add ). There are 2 storage nodes. The output tells that there is only one storage monitor available but at least 2 are required. So no disks are added. Ceph-mon-list shows that controller-0, controller-1 and storage-0 are configured as monitors, but storage-1 is not. Unlocking the storage nodes is also not posdible without configured volumes. How can I make it work? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chen.dq at neusoft.com Wed Aug 26 09:15:11 2020 From: chen.dq at neusoft.com (cdq) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 17:15:11 +0800 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Regarding Rook&Ceph ISO Test Case Message-ID: <004101d67b89$6682c330$33884990$@neusoft.com> Hi All: Based on the Rook&Ceph code, the ISO built by the engineer, the standard deployment test case and results have been updated, please refer to the document https://drive.google.com/file/d/1X2Rzl41xEL8DthUkZZbCe5wGmuaocDtO/view?usp=sharing. Everyone is welcome to review. Thanks. BR Neusoft Corporation Neusoft Group (Dalian) Co., Ltd. No. 901 Huangpu Road, Dalian 116085, PRC Website: www.neusoft.com Mobile: (86) 13050529635 Tel:(86 0411) 8483 2794 E-mail: chen.dq at neusoft.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying attachment(s) is intended only for the use of the intended recipient and may be confidential and/or privileged of Neusoft Corporation, its subsidiaries and/or its affiliates. If any reader of this communication is not the intended recipient,unauthorized use,forwarding, printing, storing, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful.If you have received this communication in error,please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail, and delete the original message and all copies from your system. Thank you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Wed Aug 26 12:51:29 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 12:51:29 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Community (& TSC) Call (August 26, 2020) Message-ID: Hi all, reminder of the TSC/Community call coming up later today. Please feel free to add items to the agenda [0] for the community call - we'll resume the stx.4.0 release retrospective that we started last week. Bill... [0] etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-status [1] call details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings#7am_PDT_.2F_1400_UTC_-_Community_Call [2] meeting start time in various time-zones: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20200826T1400 From oliver.lovaszi at intel.com Wed Aug 26 13:24:39 2020 From: oliver.lovaszi at intel.com (Lovaszi, Oliver) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 13:24:39 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200826T013433Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-24 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200826T013433Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200826T013433Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 Execution was re started TOTAL: [ 64 TCs ] Standard (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team Intel Deutschland GmbH Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Gary Kershaw Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau Registered Office: Munich Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From oliver.lovaszi at intel.com Wed Aug 26 13:34:18 2020 From: oliver.lovaszi at intel.com (Lovaszi, Oliver) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 13:34:18 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200826T013433Z In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-26 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200826T013433Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200826T013433Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 Execution was re started TOTAL: [ 64 TCs ] Standard (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team Intel Deutschland GmbH Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Gary Kershaw Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau Registered Office: Munich Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scott.little at windriver.com Wed Aug 26 13:43:38 2020 From: scott.little at windriver.com (Scott Little) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 09:43:38 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_containers_master_master - Build # 65 - Failure! In-Reply-To: References: <1005583075.2179.1598325925097.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: <7315e220-afef-e089-5695-975589e13de7@windriver.com> That should work.  I wouldn't expect any spaces in a proxy's url. Scott On 2020-08-25 11:16 p.m., Liu, ZhipengS wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > So, I need to remove “”, right? > > I will provide a fix. > > Thanks! > > Zhipeng > > *From:*Scott Little > *Sent:* 2020年8月26日4:27 > *To:* starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Liu, ZhipengS > > *Subject:* Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] > STX_build_layer_containers_master_master - Build # 65 - Failure! > > Build was broken by this update > > https://review.opendev.org/#/c/730566/ > > When no proxies are in use the build of images with customizations > fails on line ... > >     docker run "${PROXY_ARGS[@]}" --entrypoint /bin/bash --name > ${USER}_update_img ${build_image_name} -c "${CUSTOMIZATION}" > > So "${PROXY_ARGS[@]}" becomes just "" which docker thinks is the image > name, rather than ${build_image_name} > > Scott > > On 2020-08-24 11:25 p.m., build.starlingx at gmail.com > wrote: > > Project: STX_build_layer_containers_master_master > > Build #: 65 > > Status: Failure > > Timestamp: 20200825T000740Z > > Check logs at: > > http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200825T000740Z/logs > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Parameters > > BUILD_CONTAINERS_DEV: false > > BUILD_CONTAINERS_STABLE: true > > FORCE_BUILD: false > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com Wed Aug 26 14:56:15 2020 From: ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com (Ildiko Vancsa) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 16:56:15 +0200 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] PTG time slot selection - ACTION NEEDED Message-ID: Hi, As we you probably already saw on this mailing list and/or heard on the community call the PTG[1] is approaching quickly and we need to book the time slots for the project discussions on the event. I created a Doodle poll to pick preferred time slots that works for most people: https://doodle.com/poll/tmre8tbtybmrg8tx __Please fill out the poll as soon as you can with the time slots that work in your time zone if you are planning to participate in the event!__ Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Ildikó [1] https://www.openstack.org/ptg/ From ferlandm at amotus.ca Wed Aug 26 15:47:58 2020 From: ferlandm at amotus.ca (Marc Ferland) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 11:47:58 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] controller-1 rebooting Message-ID: Quick and easy one. As of starling-x 4.0.1, just how many times is the controller-1 supposed to reboot after the initial 'unlock'? Thanks, Marc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Eric.MacDonald at windriver.com Wed Aug 26 16:08:13 2020 From: Eric.MacDonald at windriver.com (MacDonald, Eric) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 16:08:13 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] controller-1 rebooting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Once as a result of the unlock. From: Marc Ferland Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 11:48 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] controller-1 rebooting Quick and easy one. As of starling-x 4.0.1, just how many times is the controller-1 supposed to reboot after the initial 'unlock'? Thanks, Marc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Wed Aug 26 17:32:50 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 17:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Community (& TSC) Call (August 26, 2020) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >From today's call: * Standing Topics * Sanity * master sanity reports are Green * there was a build issue when somebody updated the build command to take an optional proxy argument * tested ok with this argument, but failed without & since CENGN builds without, the container build failed * so the learning is if changing the build command, be sure to test with and without optional arguments * Gerrit Reviews in Need of Attention * rook ceph: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:%22ceph+containerization%22 * Topics for this Week * PTG reminder (ildikov) * https://www.openstack.org/ptg/ * https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/stx-ptg-planning-october-2020 * it's coming u, Sep 10th is the sign-up deadline, the PTG will be the week of Oct 26th * we need to start planning the typical 9-10 hours as the last time - Mon/Tue late EST, Thu early EST + 1 joint session * AR: Ildiko will send out a poll to get a feel for which time blocks are preferred by folks * we have time to sort out the list of topics that we'll discuss * Ildiko also reminded us that the forum submissions will be due soon * stx.3.0 cherry-picks pending * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009455.html * still at 5 LPs pending cherry-pick or rationale why it's not required * stx.4.0 Release Retrospective * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009433.html * Docs * per Mary, it generally went well - some chasing, but developers were responsive * Build * some issues around build layering introduction * ideally we'd have a CENGN replica environment and/or the ability for a developer to instantiate their own CENGN-like environment * there are some loose ends to tie up related to build layering, Scott hopes to do these in the stx.5.0 timeframe * some questions around whether build changes would be required for Multi-OS - need to bottom out where Multi-OS is at & what build changes will be required; AR: Scott will poke into this at the Multi-OS meeting * Python 3 * build team has been having to jump through hoops to accomodate the fact that we're in a state of supporting Python 2 and Python 3 * need to get everything on to Python 3, which is at risk since this feature is not staffed currently * Test * AR: Nic & Yang to provide some input from the test perspective * Ildiko asked if we have automation enhancements planned for stx.5.0 that would help reduce the interval for testing things, like, say, the OpenStack rebase * OpenStack * AR: Yong to say what the plan is - how soon can they start & do we feel like the lessons learned from stx.4.0/Ussuri will help us land Victoria more comfortably * ARs from Previous Meetings * Aug 19: * Build team to look into the option of manually pulling down the images periodically within a 6 month period * Scott investigating - pending this, we'll know whether we think we'll have to go with the paid option * Open Requests for Help * didn't get to this this week * Build Matters (if required) * nothing this week -----Original Message----- From: Zvonar, Bill Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 8:51 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Community (& TSC) Call (August 26, 2020) Hi all, reminder of the TSC/Community call coming up later today. Please feel free to add items to the agenda [0] for the community call - we'll resume the stx.4.0 release retrospective that we started last week. Bill... [0] etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-status [1] call details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings#7am_PDT_.2F_1400_UTC_-_Community_Call [2] meeting start time in various time-zones: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20200826T1400 From Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com Wed Aug 26 17:41:22 2020 From: Bill.Zvonar at windriver.com (Zvonar, Bill) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 17:41:22 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Minutes: StarlingX Release Meeting - Aug 20/2020 Message-ID: Notes & actions from last week's Release Team meeting: Agenda/Minutes are posted at: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-releases stx.3.0.1 * 5 bugs left to cherrypick, see http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009455.html * 1 will be cherrypicked once a review is merged, AR: Bill to chase the other 4 * besides Sanity, what kind of testing do we want to do? * we agreed that some targeted Regression makes sense, Test team to weigh in on this (AR: Yang & Nic) * communication? * use the announce mailing list * documentation * the release notes will basically be a preamble, then a list of all the bugs that are fixed in this maintenance release Issue with docker image builds * Bill has action from Community Call to follow up on this stx.4.0 * started discussing in this week's Community Call, will do more next week stx.5.0 * 11 candidate features, 6 resourced, 5 not * see https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JbOQELqXG_GDoP1jo6YoRDytpTkJEs89TVimzvrqc_A/edit#gid=1107209846 * AR: Bill to put a call out for any other candidate features for stx.5.0 From ferlandm at amotus.ca Wed Aug 26 18:52:20 2020 From: ferlandm at amotus.ca (Marc Ferland) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 14:52:20 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] controller-1 rebooting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In my AIO duplex setup (stx4), the controller-1 server rebooted I think at least 3 times before being marked as unlocked/enabled/available. This machine only has 16GB of RAM, could this be a symptom of not enough memory? Regards, Marc On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:08 PM MacDonald, Eric < Eric.MacDonald at windriver.com> wrote: > Once as a result of the unlock. > > > > *From:* Marc Ferland > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 26, 2020 11:48 AM > *To:* starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > *Subject:* [Starlingx-discuss] controller-1 rebooting > > > > Quick and easy one. > > > > As of starling-x 4.0.1, just how many times is the controller-1 supposed > to reboot after the initial 'unlock'? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Marc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scott.little at windriver.com Wed Aug 26 19:40:41 2020 From: scott.little at windriver.com (Scott Little) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 15:40:41 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Community (& TSC) Call (August 26, 2020) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5673871d-a966-3b7c-13b4-da62ea306949@windriver.com> Summary of Docker Hub changes to their terms of service.  We use 'free' accounts so far. Image retention policy - Inactive images are those that have not been pushed or pulled for 6 months. - Inactive images will be deleted from 'free' accounts.  'Pro', 'Team' and 'Verified Publishers' accounts are exempt. - Enforcement starts Nov 1, 2020. - An email notice will precede the deletion  (By how long?) - They promise a dashboard to show image age... so far I only see push age, not pull age. Repositories at risk ... we don't update these regularly ... are these all obsolete ? - starlingx/stx-magnum ... unused in master - starlingx/multis ... unused in master - starlingx/ceph-config-helper... still used ... should be ok if it gets pulled regularly. - starlingx/stx-ceph-config-helper ... replaced by, or intended to replace, ceph-config-helper? - starlingx/nova-api-proxy ... replaced by stx-nova-api-proxy Images at risk 1) 'dev' images (as opposed to 'stable')  , ok to delete 2) old feature branch images (stein, ussuri) , ok to delete 3) rc-2.0 ... we only support two most recent releases (3.0, 4.0), ok to delete 4) rc-3.0 ... should be ok if it gets pulled regularly. Rate limits on pulling images - Anonymous pull - 100/6 hrs - based on puller ip addr ... this may be an issue for some test scenarios... PV labs ? - Authenticated Free user - 200/6hrs - limit is based on puller account, not publisher account Scott On 2020-08-26 1:32 p.m., Zvonar, Bill wrote: > From today's call: > > * Standing Topics > > * Sanity > > * master sanity reports are Green > * there was a build issue when somebody updated the build command to take an optional proxy argument > * tested ok with this argument, but failed without & since CENGN builds without, the container build failed > * so the learning is if changing the build command, be sure to test with and without optional arguments > > * Gerrit Reviews in Need of Attention > > * rook ceph: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:%22ceph+containerization%22 > > * Topics for this Week > > * PTG reminder (ildikov) > > * https://www.openstack.org/ptg/ > * https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/stx-ptg-planning-october-2020 > * it's coming u, Sep 10th is the sign-up deadline, the PTG will be the week of Oct 26th > * we need to start planning the typical 9-10 hours as the last time - Mon/Tue late EST, Thu early EST + 1 joint session > * AR: Ildiko will send out a poll to get a feel for which time blocks are preferred by folks > * we have time to sort out the list of topics that we'll discuss > * Ildiko also reminded us that the forum submissions will be due soon > > * stx.3.0 cherry-picks pending > > * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009455.html > * still at 5 LPs pending cherry-pick or rationale why it's not required > > * stx.4.0 Release Retrospective > > * http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009433.html > > * Docs > * per Mary, it generally went well - some chasing, but developers were responsive > > * Build > * some issues around build layering introduction > * ideally we'd have a CENGN replica environment and/or the ability for a developer to instantiate their own CENGN-like environment > * there are some loose ends to tie up related to build layering, Scott hopes to do these in the stx.5.0 timeframe > * some questions around whether build changes would be required for Multi-OS - need to bottom out where Multi-OS is at & what build changes will be required; AR: Scott will poke into this at the Multi-OS meeting > > * Python 3 > * build team has been having to jump through hoops to accomodate the fact that we're in a state of supporting Python 2 and Python 3 > * need to get everything on to Python 3, which is at risk since this feature is not staffed currently > > * Test > * AR: Nic & Yang to provide some input from the test perspective > * Ildiko asked if we have automation enhancements planned for stx.5.0 that would help reduce the interval for testing things, like, say, the OpenStack rebase > > * OpenStack > * AR: Yong to say what the plan is - how soon can they start & do we feel like the lessons learned from stx.4.0/Ussuri will help us land Victoria more comfortably > > * ARs from Previous Meetings > > * Aug 19: > * Build team to look into the option of manually pulling down the images periodically within a 6 month period > * Scott investigating - pending this, we'll know whether we think we'll have to go with the paid option > > * Open Requests for Help > * didn't get to this this week > > * Build Matters (if required) > * nothing this week > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Zvonar, Bill > Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 8:51 AM > To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > Subject: Community (& TSC) Call (August 26, 2020) > > Hi all, reminder of the TSC/Community call coming up later today. > > Please feel free to add items to the agenda [0] for the community call - we'll resume the stx.4.0 release retrospective that we started last week. > > Bill... > > [0] etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-status > [1] call details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings#7am_PDT_.2F_1400_UTC_-_Community_Call > [2] meeting start time in various time-zones: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20200826T1400 > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss From amy at demarco.com Wed Aug 26 21:08:07 2020 From: amy at demarco.com (Amy Marrich) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 16:08:07 -0500 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [Diversity] Diversity & Inclusion WG Meeting 8/31 - Removing Divisive Language Message-ID: The Diversity & Inclusion WG has taken on the task from this week's Board meeting to assist with the development of the OSF's stance on the removal of Divisive Language within the OSF projects. The WG invites members of all OSF projects to participate in this effort and to join us at our next meeting Monday, August 31, at 17:00 UTC which will be held at https://meetpad.opendev.org/osf-diversity-and-inclusion. The agenda can be found at https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/diversity-wg-agenda. If you have any questions please let me and the team know here, on #openstack-diversity on IRC, or you can email me directly. Thanks, Amy Marrich (spotz) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From maryx.camp at intel.com Thu Aug 27 01:56:36 2020 From: maryx.camp at intel.com (Camp, MaryX) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 01:56:36 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [docs] [meeting] Docs team notes 2020-08-26 Message-ID: Hello all, Here are this week's docs team meeting minutes (short form). Details in [2]. Join us if you have interest in StarlingX docs! We meet on Wednesdays 12:30 PST.   [1]   Call logistics: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Starlingx/Meetings   [2]   Tracking Etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-documentation thanks, Mary Camp ========== 2020-08-26 All -- reviews merged since last meeting: 4 + same ones were cherry-picked into R4 branch All -- bug status -- 7 total - team agrees to defer all low priority LP until the upstreaming effort is completed. All -- Opens Can the test team be looped in to test some of our complicated procedures (ie install/deployment guides)? Greg and Mary will attend the Test meeting and ask them about it. [Next meeting 1Sept @ 8 am PDT] Upstreaming WR docs status: First trial review submitted last week. Still messing around with the script/tool output. Another user has a book that's converted and ready to submit. Requirements: should have a successful local build (tox -e docs) and review of the HTML for general structure/formatting. Then OK to submit review, start with 15-20 topics (couple chapters). Conversion questions for WR docs: 1. TOC structuring - current source in DITA is much more granular (smaller pieces). Many little pages vs fewer large pages vs combo. Easiest to start with is many little pages with nested index files - but may not be best for user - we can ask for community input on the review. 3 options: 1 index per chapter, merge into 1 chapter per file, or take the existing output and just list them out (no heirarchy) 2. Terms that will differ between STX and reimport to WR, e.g. "StarlingX" vs "Cloud Platform" aka how to handle product names. Need a variable/parameter setup. CMS uses a key-def file now. Sphinx calls this substitution: https://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/master/usage/restructuredtext/basics.html#substitutions Format like this: .. |STX| replace:: StarlingX Create a substitutions.txt file. Edit the conf.py file to reference the substitutions file. Use rst_prolog or rst_epilog to implement. Ron is working on this now, he can do pre-work on the DITA side to make it work on the export. The "only" directive could be used to build WR vs STX docs. Submit a review with the proposal -- common folder to be added to capture substitutions. 3. Should reviews be submitted on a specific branch? Work in progress should be done in a branch of your local master. When you submit a review, it is against the master branch. 4. File naming convention CMS uses letters/numbers in current filenames, the conversion tool is translating into words with hyphens. Current STX convention uses lowercase words separated by underscore. Team agreed that hyphens are OK. 5. Screenshot location (./figures or somewhere else such as /screens?) Place in a /figures folder to align with current docs. Version/tagging of STX docs Jeremy replied to discuss list (http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/2020-August/009471.html) with recommendations. Mary suggests we follow the 2nd option he mentioned - project-specific model and branch the docs when the other STX repos branch. STX docs repo already has R4 branch like this: https://opendev.org/starlingx/docs/src/branch/r/stx.4.0 Possible URL structures: https://docs.starlingx.io/R4.01 (current release) and https://docs.starlingx.io/latest for the master branch. Team agreed with this suggestion. From Ankush.Rai at commscope.com Wed Aug 26 18:24:45 2020 From: Ankush.Rai at commscope.com (Rai, Ankush) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 18:24:45 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Is there any workaround to use interface name of length more than 10? Message-ID: Hi, I am trying to bring up All-In-One-Duplex deployment. And as part of controller-1 configuration, setting OAM interface name of length 11 is failing. > OAM_IF=enp59s0f1d1 > system host-if-modify controller-1 $OAM_IF -c platform > Interface enp59s0f1d1 has name length greater than 10. Thanks, Ankush -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From austin.sun at intel.com Thu Aug 27 11:18:19 2020 From: austin.sun at intel.com (Sun, Austin) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 11:18:19 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] controller-1 rebooting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Marc: The minimum RAM is request is 32G . Please check HW requirement from https://docs.starlingx.io/deploy_install_guides/r4_release/virtual/aio_duplex_environ.html Thanks. BR Austin Sun. From: Marc Ferland Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2020 2:52 AM To: MacDonald, Eric Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] controller-1 rebooting In my AIO duplex setup (stx4), the controller-1 server rebooted I think at least 3 times before being marked as unlocked/enabled/available. This machine only has 16GB of RAM, could this be a symptom of not enough memory? Regards, Marc On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:08 PM MacDonald, Eric > wrote: Once as a result of the unlock. From: Marc Ferland > Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 11:48 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] controller-1 rebooting Quick and easy one. As of starling-x 4.0.1, just how many times is the controller-1 supposed to reboot after the initial 'unlock'? Thanks, Marc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From oliver.lovaszi at intel.com Thu Aug 27 12:24:31 2020 From: oliver.lovaszi at intel.com (Lovaszi, Oliver) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 12:24:31 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200827T022604Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-27 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200827T022604Z/outputs/iso/) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200827T022604Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 49 TCs [PASS] Sanity Platform 06 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team Intel Deutschland GmbH Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Gary Kershaw Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau Registered Office: Munich Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Don.Penney at windriver.com Thu Aug 27 13:44:38 2020 From: Don.Penney at windriver.com (Penney, Don) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 13:44:38 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Is there any workaround to use interface name of length more than 10? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think the interface name length is set to 10 characters to allow for VLAN support, where the resulting name would be an interface with name INTF.VLAN (with VLAN up to 4 digits), and the max length allowed by the kernel is 15 characters. From: Rai, Ankush Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 2:25 PM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Is there any workaround to use interface name of length more than 10? Hi, I am trying to bring up All-In-One-Duplex deployment. And as part of controller-1 configuration, setting OAM interface name of length 11 is failing. > OAM_IF=enp59s0f1d1 > system host-if-modify controller-1 $OAM_IF -c platform > Interface enp59s0f1d1 has name length greater than 10. Thanks, Ankush -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Ankush.Rai at commscope.com Thu Aug 27 13:58:52 2020 From: Ankush.Rai at commscope.com (Rai, Ankush) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 13:58:52 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Is there any workaround to use interface name of length more than 10? In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: Thanks Penney! as a workaround i changed the interface name to fit in the allowed length. But did not understand the logic of restricting the length up to 10 characters, when kernel can support up to 15 characters for an interface name. Thanks, Ankush ________________________________ From: Penney, Don Sent: 27 August 2020 19:14 To: Rai, Ankush ; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Is there any workaround to use interface name of length more than 10? I think the interface name length is set to 10 characters to allow for VLAN support, where the resulting name would be an interface with name INTF.VLAN (with VLAN up to 4 digits), and the max length a External (don.penney at windriver.com) Report This Email FAQ Protection by INKY I think the interface name length is set to 10 characters to allow for VLAN support, where the resulting name would be an interface with name INTF.VLAN (with VLAN up to 4 digits), and the max length allowed by the kernel is 15 characters. From: Rai, Ankush Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 2:25 PM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Is there any workaround to use interface name of length more than 10? Hi, I am trying to bring up All-In-One-Duplex deployment. And as part of controller-1 configuration, setting OAM interface name of length 11 is failing. > OAM_IF=enp59s0f1d1 > system host-if-modify controller-1 $OAM_IF -c platform > Interface enp59s0f1d1 has name length greater than 10. Thanks, Ankush -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From build.starlingx at gmail.com Thu Aug 27 17:52:48 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 13:52:48 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [stable] [build-report] STX_build_docker_flock_images - Build # 270 - Still Failing! In-Reply-To: <240137786.2171.1598325914022.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> References: <240137786.2171.1598325914022.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: <1957524622.2192.1598550787122.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_docker_flock_images Build #: 270 Status: Still Failing Timestamp: 20200827T140618Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200827T132712Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters HOST_PORT: 80 MY_WORKSPACE: /localdisk/loadbuild/jenkins/master-containers/20200827T132712Z OS: centos MY_REPO: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master-containers/cgcs-root BASE_VERSION: master-stable-20200827T132712Z PUBLISH_LOGS_URL: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200827T132712Z/logs REGISTRY_USERID: slittlewrs HOST: build.starlingx.cengn.ca LATEST_PREFIX: master PUBLISH_LOGS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200827T132712Z/logs PUBLISH_TIMESTAMP: 20200827T132712Z FLOCK_VERSION: master-centos-stable-20200827T132712Z PREFIX: master TIMESTAMP: 20200827T132712Z BUILD_STREAM: stable REGISTRY_ORG: starlingx PUBLISH_OUTPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200827T132712Z/outputs REGISTRY: docker.io From build.starlingx at gmail.com Thu Aug 27 17:53:08 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 13:53:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [stable] [build-report] STX_build_docker_images_layered - Build # 45 - Still Failing! In-Reply-To: <1220350402.2174.1598325917317.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> References: <1220350402.2174.1598325917317.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: <1080234674.2195.1598550789393.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_docker_images_layered Build #: 45 Status: Still Failing Timestamp: 20200827T134602Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200827T132712Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters BRANCH: master MY_WORKSPACE: /localdisk/loadbuild/jenkins/master-containers/20200827T132712Z OS: centos MUNGED_BRANCH: master MY_REPO: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master-containers/cgcs-root PUBLISH_LOGS_URL: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200827T132712Z/logs MASTER_BUILD_NUMBER: 66 PUBLISH_LOGS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200827T132712Z/logs MASTER_JOB_NAME: STX_build_layer_containers_master_master MY_REPO_ROOT: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master-containers PUBLISH_DISTRO_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers PUBLISH_TIMESTAMP: 20200827T132712Z DOCKER_BUILD_ID: jenkins-master-containers-20200827T132712Z-builder TIMESTAMP: 20200827T132712Z OS_VERSION: 7.5.1804 BUILD_STREAM: stable PUBLISH_INPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200827T132712Z/inputs LAYER: containers PUBLISH_OUTPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200827T132712Z/outputs From build.starlingx at gmail.com Thu Aug 27 17:53:10 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 13:53:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_layer_containers_master_master - Build # 66 - Still Failing! In-Reply-To: <722413132.2177.1598325919317.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> References: <722413132.2177.1598325919317.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Message-ID: <1016082276.2198.1598550791504.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_layer_containers_master_master Build #: 66 Status: Still Failing Timestamp: 20200827T132712Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/containers/20200827T132712Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters BUILD_CONTAINERS_DEV: false BUILD_CONTAINERS_STABLE: true FORCE_BUILD: true From Ankush.Rai at commscope.com Thu Aug 27 18:19:20 2020 From: Ankush.Rai at commscope.com (Rai, Ankush) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 18:19:20 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Is this possible to make use of single NIC interface in Starlingx deployment ? Message-ID: Any pointers for StarlingX deployment with single NIC interface? (Duplex or multi-node cluster) How to configure VLAN tagging for OAM and Management ? Thanks, Ankush -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marc.ferland at gmail.com Thu Aug 27 18:21:57 2020 From: marc.ferland at gmail.com (Marc Ferland) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 14:21:57 -0400 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Is this possible to make use of single NIC interface in Starlingx deployment ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This should get you going: https://docs.starlingx.io/configuration/host_interface_network_config.html#network-configuration-and-assignment On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 2:20 PM Rai, Ankush wrote: > Any pointers for StarlingX deployment with single NIC interface? (Duplex > or multi-node cluster) > How to configure VLAN tagging for OAM and Management ? > > Thanks, > Ankush > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Ankush.Rai at commscope.com Thu Aug 27 18:46:29 2020 From: Ankush.Rai at commscope.com (Rai, Ankush) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 18:46:29 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] How to change docker default subnet? Message-ID: Is there any Ansible configuration or CLI to redefine the docker subnet ? This default subnet 172.17. 0.0/16 is clashing with LAB network and I am not able to access the StarlingX cluster from LAB network. Is it feasible to use "bip" option in "/etc/docker/daemon.json" ? Thanks, Ankush -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Ankush.Rai at commscope.com Fri Aug 28 05:36:34 2020 From: Ankush.Rai at commscope.com (Rai, Ankush) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 05:36:34 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Unable to reconfigure the edge cloud if its addition failed Message-ID: subcloud add failed with image download error, because the edge Host does not have internet connectivity and no local registry is setup. > TASK [common/push-docker-images : Download images and push to local registry] *** > stdout": "\r\n Image download failed: k8s.gcr.io/kube-apiserver:v1.18.1500 Server Error: Internal Server Error But after enabling the internet connectivity, i am unable to reconfigure the edge > dcmanager subcloud reconfig --deploy-config bootstrap-values.yml 1 > ERROR (app) Unable to reconfigure subcloud 1 [sysadmin at controller-1 ~(keystone_admin)]$ dcmanager subcloud list +----+-------+------------+--------------+------------------+---------+ | id | name | management | availability | deploy status | sync | +----+-------+------------+--------------+------------------+---------+ | 1 | edge1 | unmanaged | offline | bootstrap-failed | unknown | +----+-------+------------+--------------+------------------+---------+ Any idea how to re-initialize/reconfigure the edge if its addition failed first time Thanks, Ankush -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pvmpublic at gmail.com Fri Aug 28 09:40:15 2020 From: pvmpublic at gmail.com (Pratik M.) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 15:10:15 +0530 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Increasing size of STX docker registry (docker-distribution) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, I presume you have already tried a "system registry-garbage-collect " There is a "system controllerfs-modify". I have never tried it. The help indicates that you would do a: system controllerfs-modify docker-distribution=20 [sysadmin at controller-0 ~(keystone_admin)]$ system controllerfs-list +--------------------------------------+---------------------+------+-----------------------+------------+-------+ | UUID | FS Name | Size | Logical Volume | Replicated | State | | | | in | | | | | | | GiB | | | | +--------------------------------------+---------------------+------+-----------------------+------------+-------+ | 208360ea-9aa0-47d4-a650-3867e89999f0 | extension | 1 | extension-lv | True | None | | 22d2d5e6-4a37-4d24-ab41-564b7255c4c4 | docker-distribution | 16 | dockerdistribution-lv | True | None | | 5f0e141c-734f-443c-90e5-93148f3707fc | platform | 10 | platform-lv | True | None | | 9ae55267-79b3-4169-9be1-849c22ccfa8a | etcd | 5 | etcd-lv | True | None | | d7029579-e8b8-4e79-8f41-bc50fdbeada3 | database | 10 | pgsql-lv | True | None | +--------------------------------------+---------------------+------+-----------------------+------------+-------+ BR On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:47 PM Shashi, Yatindra wrote: > > HI All, > > I have Duplex Extended mode setup for stx 3.0. > > > > I am running out of space on docker registry: > > > > /dev/drbd8 16496984 15759452 39616 100% /var/lib/docker-distribution > > > > Is there any way to increase the size of the registry as we cannot really clean up the images/tags? > > > > I see the link here but don’t see methods to increase size: > https://docs.starlingx.io/operations/k8s_docker_reg_management.html > > > > > > Mit freundlichen Grüßen/ with best regards, > > Yatindra Shashi > > IoTG DE- Intel Corporation > > Munich, Germany > > > > P > > Save Paper, Go Digital J > > > > > > > > Intel Deutschland GmbH > Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany > Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de > Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Gary Kershaw > Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau > Registered Office: Munich > Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 > > _______________________________________________ > Starlingx-discuss mailing list > Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pvmpublic at gmail.com Fri Aug 28 09:50:50 2020 From: pvmpublic at gmail.com (Pratik M.) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 15:20:50 +0530 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] bnx2x driver panic. Is source same as CentOS 7? In-Reply-To: <77729dd1-700c-a2e7-c5f3-11c6ff83c0d2@linux.intel.com> References: <2dc146c6-aac5-cd00-2b10-0984af564104@linux.intel.com> <77729dd1-700c-a2e7-c5f3-11c6ff83c0d2@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: Hi, Thank you Don and Saul for looking into this. Seems http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/linux-firmware-20191202-97.gite8a0f4c9.el8.noarch.rpm is the rpm to use. Rather than the linux-firmware-20190429-72.gitddde598.el7.noarch.rpm, used currently. I will try to submit a diff, but not sure if I understood the update-pxe-network-installer script entirely. BR Pratik On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 3:49 AM Saul Wold wrote: > Don: Thanks! I had a similar email queued up! > > Pratik: I have added some additional information. > > On 8/17/20 2:42 PM, Penney, Don wrote: > > Firmware isn’t my area, but we don’t have bnx2x-bnxZ2x-e2-7.13.11.0.fw > > in our load at all. We are currently including > > linux-firmware-20190429-72.gitddde598.el7.noarch.rpm in our system: > > > > > https://opendev.org/starlingx/tools/src/commit/e390e85bd5f079d827bfabb69208cd12ec4de02e/centos-mirror-tools/config/centos/flock/rpms_centos.lst#L536 > > > > The closest it has to what you’re looking for is: > > > > /usr/lib/firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e1-7.13.11.0.fw > > > > /usr/lib/firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e1h-7.13.11.0.fw > > > > /usr/lib/firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e2-7.13.11.0.fw > > > I think that the e2-7.13.11.0 will work. > > > I see nothing with bnxZ2x. > > > > We don’t currently update the initrd or squashfs (installer rootfs) with > > the linux-firmware RPM, so we just have what’s in the stock installer > > images. The initrd only has a handful of firmware images, while the > > squashfs.img appears to have a slightly older version of the > > linux-firmware RPM content (missing the 7.13.11.0 images listed above). > > > Yeah, I was looking into this also, there is the 7.13.1.0 firmware > > > If the firmware you need is in a newer version of the linux-firmware > > RPM, we’d need to update the rpms_centos.lst file to move to the newer > > version, and also update the update-pxe-network-installer utility to > > update the linux-firmware RPM content in the initrd.img and squashfs.img > > images: > > > > > https://opendev.org/starlingx/root/src/branch/master/build-tools/update-pxe-network-installer > > > A quick starting point might be to try adding the newer firmware load > into the /pxeboot/rel-20.06/installer-intel-x86-64-initrd_1.0 image on > Controller-0. If I remember your trying to use this for Controller-1. > > We would welcome a general change that could add specified > modules/firmware to the initrd.img based on what Don suggested above. > > Sau! > > > Cheers, > > > > Don. > > > > *From:* Pratik M. > > *Sent:* Monday, August 17, 2020 6:44 AM > > *To:* Saul Wold > > *Cc:* starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io > > *Subject:* Re: [Starlingx-discuss] bnx2x driver panic. Is source same as > > CentOS 7? > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:46 PM Pratik M. > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 8:56 PM Saul Wold > > wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > > Can you try installing from the master ISO to see if the 4.18 kernel > > > > addresses these panics? > > > > > > Sure, I will try and update. > > > > Hi, > > > > As an update, I tried using R4.0, but that didn't work. Is it because > > the initrd does not have the necessary firmware? > > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1891876 > > > > Thanks > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From oliver.lovaszi at intel.com Fri Aug 28 12:27:55 2020 From: oliver.lovaszi at intel.com (Lovaszi, Oliver) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 12:27:55 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200828T013422Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-27 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200828T013422Z/outputs/iso/) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200828T013422Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 06 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team Intel Deutschland GmbH Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Gary Kershaw Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau Registered Office: Munich Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From oliver.lovaszi at intel.com Fri Aug 28 12:28:57 2020 From: oliver.lovaszi at intel.com (Lovaszi, Oliver) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 12:28:57 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200828T013422Z - UPDATE Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-28 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200828T013422Z/outputs/iso/) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200828T013422Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 06 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team Intel Deutschland GmbH Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Gary Kershaw Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau Registered Office: Munich Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From maryx.camp at intel.com Fri Aug 28 14:57:36 2020 From: maryx.camp at intel.com (Camp, MaryX) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:57:36 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [docs] [meeting] Docs team notes 2020-08-19 In-Reply-To: <20200820160118.ilnaqgukaqh2oraj@yuggoth.org> References: <20200820160118.ilnaqgukaqh2oraj@yuggoth.org> Message-ID: Thanks for the help Jeremy. In the docs meeting this week, the team agreed to follow the 2nd option you mentioned: the project-specific model and we'll branch the docs when the other STX repos branch. The STX docs repo already has an R4 branch: https://opendev.org/starlingx/docs/src/branch/r/stx.4.0 so that part is done. Our planned URL structures are: https://docs.starlingx.io/R4.01 (current release) and https://docs.starlingx.io/latest for the master branch. Our goal is for the STX docs website to operate like the Horizon one with a version selection button in the titlerow.html (Nova doesn't have this button). On the STX website, the button is implemented, but only "latest" is available. Horizon examples: https://docs.openstack.org/horizon/latest/ and https://docs.openstack.org/horizon/ussuri/ The Horizon docs are included in the project repo here: https://opendev.org/openstack/horizon/src/branch/master/doc Appreciate your guidance for next steps to making this work. thanks, Mary Camp PTIGlobal Technical Writer | maryx.camp at intel.com -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Stanley Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2020 12:01 PM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [docs] [meeting] Docs team notes 2020-08-19 On 2020-08-20 01:34:37 +0000 (+0000), Camp, MaryX wrote: [...] > Version/tagging of STX docs > Ildiko talked to Doug who was involved when STX docs were first > set up. It's been a while... he suggested that we start by > deciding what the docs URL should look like, for example, what > will be the "release" identifier (name, number, something > else?). That will help us decide how to handle the repository. > Probably won't need all the structure that OpenStack manuals > uses (because they pull from so many different projects). Dig > into some of the OS templates, figure out where the release > info gets pulled into the scripts. Use the stable branches and > dig into how the OpenStack docs are working. > > Jimmy and Jeremy may be helpful with the URL decision also. > > Next steps: URL structure - decide it. Look at build jobs for > the OS jobs. [...] I looked closer at these some last week. In OpenStack this is done two different ways... The central repository for the main https://docs.openstack.org/ site is "branchless" (from a Git perspective) and maintains parallel directory trees for the various releases: https://opendev.org/openstack/openstack-manuals/src/branch/master/www The project-specific documentation such as https://docs.openstack.org/nova/ussuri/admin/ is embedded within the project repositories and so it branches along with them: https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/stable/ussuri/doc/source/admin I would say this is really the first question to answer when it comes to designing your publication pipeline. I gather you plan to keep a single, central documentation repository for now; do you want a repository branch for each version of the documentation or to keep the various versions in different directories within a single branch? The answer to this will determine how your publication jobs need to work (whether they build all versions each time they're updated and then redeploy the entire site, or build only the version which is being modified and then deploy just that part of the site). We've basically solved this both ways, so can fairly easily support either option. -- Jeremy Stanley From build.starlingx at gmail.com Sat Aug 29 07:41:58 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2020 03:41:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_publish - Build # 1538 - Failure! Message-ID: <947508596.2206.1598686919369.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_publish Build #: 1538 Status: Failure Timestamp: 20200829T074157Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200829T043013Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters MY_WORKSPACE: /localdisk/loadbuild/jenkins/master/20200829T043013Z OS: centos PUBLISH_LOGS_URL: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200829T043013Z/logs TIMESTAMP: 20200829T043013Z PUBLISH_INPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200829T043013Z/inputs PUBLISH_LOGS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200829T043013Z/logs MASTER_JOB_NAME: STX_build_master_master LAYER: PUBLISH_OUTPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200829T043013Z/outputs MY_REPO_ROOT: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master PUBLISH_DISTRO_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic From build.starlingx at gmail.com Sat Aug 29 07:42:00 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2020 03:42:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_build_master_master - Build # 657 - Failure! Message-ID: <1781611289.2209.1598686921465.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_build_master_master Build #: 657 Status: Failure Timestamp: 20200829T043013Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200829T043013Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters BUILD_CONTAINERS_DEV: false BUILD_CONTAINERS_STABLE: false FORCE_BUILD: true From alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Sat Aug 29 17:07:13 2020 From: alexandru.dimofte at intel.com (Dimofte, Alexandru) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2020 17:07:13 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Sanity Master Test LAYERED build ISO 20200829T013432Z Message-ID: Sanity Test from 2020-August-29 (http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200829T013432Z/outputs/iso/ ) Status: GREEN Helm-Chart used: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200829T013432Z/outputs/helm-charts/helm-charts-stx-openstack-centos-stable-versioned.tgz =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Bare Metal 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 06 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 ] =========================================== Sanity Test executed on Virtual Environment 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 (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 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 ] Regards, STX Validation Team [cid:image003.png at 01D10733.2D2570D0] Dimofte Alexandru Software Engineer Transportation Solutions Division Skype no: +40 336403734 Personal Mobile: +40 743167456 alexandru.dimofte at intel.com Intel Romania -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 20512 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From build.starlingx at gmail.com Mon Aug 31 11:14:06 2020 From: build.starlingx at gmail.com (build.starlingx at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 07:14:06 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [build-report] STX_retag_docker_images - Build # 188 - Failure! Message-ID: <1689032318.2225.1598872446751.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> Project: STX_retag_docker_images Build #: 188 Status: Failure Timestamp: 20200831T111358Z Check logs at: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200831T043010Z/logs -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parameters HOST_PORT: 80 OLD_LATEST_PREFIX: master WEB_HOST: mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca MY_WORKSPACE: /localdisk/loadbuild/jenkins/master/20200831T043010Z OS: centos MY_REPO: /localdisk/designer/jenkins/master/cgcs-root BASE_VERSION: master-stable-20200831T043010Z PUBLISH_LOGS_URL: http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200831T043010Z/logs REGISTRY_USERID: slittlewrs LATEST_PREFIX: master PUBLISH_LOGS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200831T043010Z/logs RETAG_IMAGE_LIST: stx-fm-rest-api stx-libvirt stx-mariadb FLOCK_VERSION: master-centos-stable-20200831T043010Z PREFIX: master TIMESTAMP: 20200831T043010Z BUILD_STREAM: dev REGISTRY_ORG: slittlewrs PUBLISH_OUTPUTS_BASE: /export/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/monolithic/20200831T043010Z/outputs REGISTRY: docker.io OLD_BUILD_STREAM: stable From ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com Mon Aug 31 14:11:19 2020 From: ildiko.vancsa at gmail.com (Ildiko Vancsa) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 16:11:19 +0200 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] PTG time slot selection - ACTION NEEDED In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40F1AED6-4F57-4F8A-A2DD-C915CBB67CA5@gmail.com> Hi, It is a friendly reminder to please fill out the Doodle poll to pick time slots for the upcoming PTG: https://doodle.com/poll/tmre8tbtybmrg8tx Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Ildikó > On Aug 26, 2020, at 16:56, Ildiko Vancsa wrote: > > Hi, > > As we you probably already saw on this mailing list and/or heard on the community call the PTG[1] is approaching quickly and we need to book the time slots for the project discussions on the event. > > I created a Doodle poll to pick preferred time slots that works for most people: https://doodle.com/poll/tmre8tbtybmrg8tx > > __Please fill out the poll as soon as you can with the time slots that work in your time zone if you are planning to participate in the event!__ > > Please let me know if you have any questions. > > Thanks, > Ildikó > > [1] https://www.openstack.org/ptg/ > > From Frank.Miller at windriver.com Mon Aug 31 15:00:10 2020 From: Frank.Miller at windriver.com (Miller, Frank) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 15:00:10 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] STX containerization meetings stopped Message-ID: The number of topics for STX containerization has significantly reduced with the release of stx.4.0. As such I am cancelling the bi-weekly meetings at this time. If there is a need to revive these meetings during stx.5.0 I will send an email to announce when the next meeting will occur. Frank PL STX Containers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From haochuan.z.chen at intel.com Mon Aug 31 15:15:33 2020 From: haochuan.z.chen at intel.com (Chen, Haochuan Z) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 15:15:33 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] patch review for rook-ceph Message-ID: Thanks AL review my patch for rook-ceph Appreciate more reviewer for my patch. https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:%22ceph+containerization%22+(status:open+OR+status:merged) Thanks! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kendall at openstack.org Mon Aug 31 17:39:51 2020 From: kendall at openstack.org (Kendall Waters) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 12:39:51 -0500 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] vPTG October 2020 Team Signup Reminder Message-ID: Hello Everyone! Wanted to give you all a reminder that the deadline for signing up teams for the PTG is approaching! The virtual PTG will be held from Monday October 26th to Friday October 30th, 2020. To signup your team, you must complete BOTH the survey[1] AND reserve time in the ethercalc[2] by September 11th at 7:00 UTC. We ask that the PTL/SIG Chair/Team lead sign up for time to have their discussions in with 4 rules/guidelines. 1. Cross project discussions (like SIGs or support project teams) should be scheduled towards the start of the week so that any discussions that might shape those of other teams happen first. 2. No team should sign up for more than 4 hours per UTC day to help keep participants actively engaged. 3. No team should sign up for more than 16 hours across all time slots to avoid burning out our contributors and to enable participation in multiple teams discussions. Once your team is signed up, please register[3]! And remind your team to register! Registration is free, but since it will be how we contact you with passwords, event details, etc. it is still important! If you have any questions, please let us know. -The Kendalls (diablo_rojo & wendallkaters) [1] Team Survey: https://openstackfoundation.formstack.com/forms/oct2020_vptg_survey [2] Ethercalc Signup: https://ethercalc.openstack.org/7xp2pcbh1ncb [3] PTG Registration: https://october2020ptg.eventbrite.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From maryx.camp at intel.com Mon Aug 31 18:53:16 2020 From: maryx.camp at intel.com (Camp, MaryX) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 18:53:16 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] patch review for rook-ceph In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Martin, There are 5 reviews in progress for STX docs for rook-ceph. Can you please resolve the outstanding comments? Then the docs team will review again. https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+project:starlingx/docs+branch:master+topic:ceph-cluster-editorial Thanks in advance, Mary Camp PTIGlobal Technical Writer | maryx.camp at intel.com From: Chen, Haochuan Z Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 11:16 AM To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io; Bailey, Henry Albert (Al) Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] patch review for rook-ceph Thanks AL review my patch for rook-ceph Appreciate more reviewer for my patch. https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:%22ceph+containerization%22+(status:open+OR+status:merged) Thanks! Martin, Chen IOTG, Software Engineer 021-61164330 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fungi at yuggoth.org Mon Aug 31 20:07:08 2020 From: fungi at yuggoth.org (Jeremy Stanley) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 20:07:08 +0000 Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [docs] [meeting] Docs team notes 2020-08-19 In-Reply-To: References: <20200820160118.ilnaqgukaqh2oraj@yuggoth.org> Message-ID: <20200831200707.ik2usiqak37mconr@yuggoth.org> On 2020-08-28 14:57:36 +0000 (+0000), Camp, MaryX wrote: > Thanks for the help Jeremy. In the docs meeting this week, the > team agreed to follow the 2nd option you mentioned: the > project-specific model and we'll branch the docs when the other > STX repos branch. > > The STX docs repo already has an R4 branch: > https://opendev.org/starlingx/docs/src/branch/r/stx.4.0 so that > part is done. Our planned URL structures are: > https://docs.starlingx.io/R4.01 (current release) and > https://docs.starlingx.io/latest for the master branch. Great, that helps narrow down what we need to consider. > Our goal is for the STX docs website to operate like the Horizon > one with a version selection button in the titlerow.html (Nova > doesn't have this button). On the STX website, the button is > implemented, but only "latest" is available. Oh, yep, I hadn't even spotted that control. I guess I've been trained to ignore anything rendered in grey. > Horizon examples: https://docs.openstack.org/horizon/latest/ and > https://docs.openstack.org/horizon/ussuri/ > > The Horizon docs are included in the project repo here: > https://opendev.org/openstack/horizon/src/branch/master/doc [...] Thanks, examples are very useful since it's often easier to do a bit of reverse engineering to find out how it got implemented. In this case I see the problem straight away. The Sphinx extension which identifies the version names can be found here: [Forgive the long permalink, it's for posterity since this discussion will live in the ML archive long after the file in Git has changed.] As you can see, that script is, at documentation build time, scraping the project repository's branch list to find any which start with the prefix "stable" (an OpenStack convention) so that it can figure out what "interesting_series" to return in the _get_other_versions() function. That entire extension is, quite frankly, full of OpenStackisms. I can imagine two solutions to this: expand the extension's scope or fork it. I suppose there's also a middle ground where we extract the OpenStackisms from ext.py into a separate replaceable module and then we'd only need to fork that module. I'll see if anybody in the OpenStack Technical Writing SIG has an opinion on whether the scope expansion or refactoring solutions would be acceptable to them, since they're co-maintainers of openstackdocstheme (along with the OpenStack Oslo team). Ultimately, though, if you're considering eventually forking all of openstackdocstheme anyway, this might be the change which pushes that decision over the edge. -- Jeremy Stanley -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 963 bytes Desc: not available URL: