Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] [qa] Testing config drive creation in our CI
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:29 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/26/2016 07:15 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: >> On 09/26/2016 01:09 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >>> This should probably be set at the job level, and not buried inside >>> devstack to be different based on hypervisor. That's going to be a lot >>> more confusing to unwind later. >> >> Fair. So should we just set DEVSTACK_GATE_CONFIGDRIVE for all our jobs? >> Do you think it should go somewhere here: >> https://github.com/openstack-infra/devstack-gate/blob/7ecc7dd4067d99e0fa7525a9fffc8b05e1a7b58f/devstack-vm-gate.sh#L343-L370 >> ? > > The devstack-gate change is probably sufficient. > > That being said, you can also add "config_drive": True to the server > create json per request, and it will use a config drive. That may be a > better option for testing, as it will let you specify at the test level > what needs config drive testing. > > http://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=create-server-detail#id7 Well, we use some of the nova tests from tempest's trees, so that probably isn't an option here. :) We've been trying a bit to move things out of d-s-g and into project-config, so I'd rather put it into project-config unless we have a good reason not to do so. // jim __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] [qa] Testing config drive creation in our CI
On 09/26/2016 07:15 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > On 09/26/2016 01:09 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >> This should probably be set at the job level, and not buried inside >> devstack to be different based on hypervisor. That's going to be a lot >> more confusing to unwind later. > > Fair. So should we just set DEVSTACK_GATE_CONFIGDRIVE for all our jobs? > Do you think it should go somewhere here: > https://github.com/openstack-infra/devstack-gate/blob/7ecc7dd4067d99e0fa7525a9fffc8b05e1a7b58f/devstack-vm-gate.sh#L343-L370 > ? The devstack-gate change is probably sufficient. That being said, you can also add "config_drive": True to the server create json per request, and it will use a config drive. That may be a better option for testing, as it will let you specify at the test level what needs config drive testing. http://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=create-server-detail#id7 -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] [qa] Testing config drive creation in our CI
On 09/26/2016 01:09 PM, Sean Dague wrote: This should probably be set at the job level, and not buried inside devstack to be different based on hypervisor. That's going to be a lot more confusing to unwind later. Fair. So should we just set DEVSTACK_GATE_CONFIGDRIVE for all our jobs? Do you think it should go somewhere here: https://github.com/openstack-infra/devstack-gate/blob/7ecc7dd4067d99e0fa7525a9fffc8b05e1a7b58f/devstack-vm-gate.sh#L343-L370 ? -Sean On 09/26/2016 04:55 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: Just bringing QA folks attention: please merge https://review.openstack.org/#/c/375467/ as we've regressed in our testing coverage (see below for details). On 09/23/2016 08:21 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: Hi folks! We've found out that we're not testing creating of config drives in our CI. It ended up in one combination being actually broken (pxe_* + wholedisk + configdrive). I would like to cover this testing gap. Is there any benefit in NOT using config drives in all jobs? I assume we should not bother too much testing the metadata service, as it's not within our code base (unlike config drive). I've proposed https://review.openstack.org/375362 to switch our tempest plugin to testing config drives, please vote. As you see one job fails on it - this is the breakage I was talking about. It will (hopefully) get fixed with the next release of ironic-lib. Right, so as Pavlo mentioned in the patch, configdrive used to be the default for devstack, and as such we forced configdrive for all tests. When that was changed, we didn't notice because somehow metadata service worked. https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/commit/7682ea88a6ab8693b215646f16748dbbc2476cc4 I agree, we should go back to using configdrive for all tests. // jim Finally, we need to run all jobs on ironic-lib, not only one, as ironic-lib is not the basis for all deployment variants. This will probably happen after we switch our DSVM jobs to Xenial though. -- Dmitry __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] [qa] Testing config drive creation in our CI
This should probably be set at the job level, and not buried inside devstack to be different based on hypervisor. That's going to be a lot more confusing to unwind later. -Sean On 09/26/2016 04:55 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > Just bringing QA folks attention: please merge > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/375467/ as we've regressed in our > testing coverage (see below for details). > > On 09/23/2016 08:21 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Dmitry Tantsur >> wrote: >>> Hi folks! >>> >>> We've found out that we're not testing creating of config drives in >>> our CI. >>> It ended up in one combination being actually broken (pxe_* + >>> wholedisk + >>> configdrive). I would like to cover this testing gap. Is there any >>> benefit >>> in NOT using config drives in all jobs? I assume we should not bother >>> too >>> much testing the metadata service, as it's not within our code base >>> (unlike >>> config drive). >>> >>> I've proposed https://review.openstack.org/375362 to switch our tempest >>> plugin to testing config drives, please vote. As you see one job >>> fails on it >>> - this is the breakage I was talking about. It will (hopefully) get >>> fixed >>> with the next release of ironic-lib. >> >> Right, so as Pavlo mentioned in the patch, configdrive used to be the >> default >> for devstack, and as such we forced configdrive for all tests. When >> that was >> changed, we didn't notice because somehow metadata service worked. >> https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/commit/7682ea88a6ab8693b215646f16748dbbc2476cc4 >> >> >> I agree, we should go back to using configdrive for all tests. >> >> // jim >> >>> >>> Finally, we need to run all jobs on ironic-lib, not only one, as >>> ironic-lib >>> is not the basis for all deployment variants. This will probably happen >>> after we switch our DSVM jobs to Xenial though. >>> >>> -- Dmitry >>> >>> __ >>> >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Unsubscribe: >>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> __ >> >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Sean Dague http://dague.net __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] [qa] Testing config drive creation in our CI
Just bringing QA folks attention: please merge https://review.openstack.org/#/c/375467/ as we've regressed in our testing coverage (see below for details). On 09/23/2016 08:21 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: Hi folks! We've found out that we're not testing creating of config drives in our CI. It ended up in one combination being actually broken (pxe_* + wholedisk + configdrive). I would like to cover this testing gap. Is there any benefit in NOT using config drives in all jobs? I assume we should not bother too much testing the metadata service, as it's not within our code base (unlike config drive). I've proposed https://review.openstack.org/375362 to switch our tempest plugin to testing config drives, please vote. As you see one job fails on it - this is the breakage I was talking about. It will (hopefully) get fixed with the next release of ironic-lib. Right, so as Pavlo mentioned in the patch, configdrive used to be the default for devstack, and as such we forced configdrive for all tests. When that was changed, we didn't notice because somehow metadata service worked. https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/commit/7682ea88a6ab8693b215646f16748dbbc2476cc4 I agree, we should go back to using configdrive for all tests. // jim Finally, we need to run all jobs on ironic-lib, not only one, as ironic-lib is not the basis for all deployment variants. This will probably happen after we switch our DSVM jobs to Xenial though. -- Dmitry __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
