Re: [ovirt-devel] dynamic ownership changes

On 19/04/18 14:54 +0300, Elad Ben Aharon wrote: > Hi Martin, > > I see [1] requires a rebase, can you please take care? > Should be rebased. At the moment, our automation is stable only on iSCSI, NFS, Gluster and FC. > Ceph is not supported and Cinder will be stabilized soon, AFAIR, it's not > stable enough at the moment. > That is still pretty good. [1] https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/89830/ > > > Thanks > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Martin Polednik <mpolednik(a)redhat.com&gt; > wrote: > > On 18/04/18 11:37 +0300, Elad Ben Aharon wrote: >> >> Hi, sorry if I misunderstood, I waited for more input regarding what >>> areas >>> have to be tested here. >>> >>> >> I'd say that you have quite a bit of freedom in this regard. GlusterFS >> should be covered by Dennis, so iSCSI/NFS/ceph/cinder with some suite >> that covers basic operations (start & stop VM, migrate it), snapshots >> and merging them, and whatever else would be important for storage >> sanity. >> >> mpolednik >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Martin Polednik <mpolednik(a)redhat.com&gt; >> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 11/04/18 16:52 +0300, Elad Ben Aharon wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> We can test this on iSCSI, NFS and GlusterFS. As for ceph and cinder, >>>> >>>>> will >>>>> have to check, since usually, we don't execute our automation on them. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Any update on this? I believe the gluster tests were successful, OST >>>> passes fine and unit tests pass fine, that makes the storage backends >>>> test the last required piece. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Raz Tamir <ratamir(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> +Elad >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Nir Soffer <nsoffer(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:31 PM Eyal Edri <eedri(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please make sure to run as much OST suites on this patch as >>>>>>>> possible >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> before merging ( using 'ci please build' ) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But note that OST is not a way to verify the patch. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Such changes require testing with all storage types we support. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Nir >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Martin Polednik < >>>>>>>> mpolednik(a)redhat.com >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hey, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I've created a patch[0] that is finally able to activate >>>>>>>>>> libvirt's >>>>>>>>>> dynamic_ownership for VDSM while not negatively affecting >>>>>>>>>> functionality of our storage code. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That of course comes with quite a bit of code removal, mostly in >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> area of host devices, hwrng and anything that touches devices; >>>>>>>>>> bunch >>>>>>>>>> of test changes and one XML generation caveat (storage is handled >>>>>>>>>> by >>>>>>>>>> VDSM, therefore disk relabelling needs to be disabled on the VDSM >>>>>>>>>> level). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Because of the scope of the patch, I welcome storage/virt/network >>>>>>>>>> people to review the code and consider the implication this >>>>>>>>>> change >>>>>>>>>> has >>>>>>>>>> on current/future features. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [0] https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/89830/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In particular: dynamic_ownership was set to 0 prehistorically >>>>>>>>>> (as >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> part >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554961 ) because >>>>>>> libvirt, >>>>>>> running as root, was not able to play properly with root-squash nfs >>>>>>> mounts. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Have you attempted this use case? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I join to Nir's request to run this with storage QE. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Raz Tamir >>>>>> Manager, RHV QE >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>