Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-cloudstack-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-cloudstack-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4986417727 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 07:35:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 5368 invoked by uid 500); 16 Sep 2015 07:35:41 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cloudstack-dev-archive@cloudstack.apache.org Received: (qmail 5309 invoked by uid 500); 16 Sep 2015 07:35:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cloudstack.apache.org Received: (qmail 5298 invoked by uid 99); 16 Sep 2015 07:35:41 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 07:35:41 +0000 Received: from mail-oi0-f46.google.com (mail-oi0-f46.google.com [209.85.218.46]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id 4C9C91A0181 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 07:35:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by oiww128 with SMTP id w128so115181517oiw.2 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:35:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.182.33.197 with SMTP id t5mr23106014obi.40.1442388940640; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:35:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.202.73.65 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:35:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87C9423F-8190-4133-9CB8-F1D0AD36CD20@schubergphilis.com> References: <93238155381A8343BD3FFE2CB75BC9E723B57AC3@SINPEX01CL01.citrite.net> <42A093A5-15CF-49E3-B454-7147965F00A7@citrix.com> <1500A744-DADD-409D-9021-83DBCCF42F6C@citrix.com> <45F3A8D2-426F-4C68-A629-CDC034A19C5B@schubergphilis.com> <2085CCA4-C81E-4D8C-BED5-67D714AED8B3@citrix.com> <93238155381A8343BD3FFE2CB75BC9E723B5913E@SINPEX01CL01.citrite.net> <4CF7B92F-CB71-40D6-B366-7922A511CCD4@citrix.com> <87C9423F-8190-4133-9CB8-F1D0AD36CD20@schubergphilis.com> From: Rajani Karuturi Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 13:05:21 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [BLOCKER] - Guest VMs are not getting IPs as the DHCP port is not opened in VR To: Wilder Rodrigues Cc: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" , Remi Bergsma , Rajani Karuturi Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2cd9a6f59c4051fd85839 --001a11c2cd9a6f59c4051fd85839 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable completely agree. We lack dev support for fixing and testing networking issues :( PS: I feel like there should be document in github describing contributor / reviewer / jira guidelines ~Rajani On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Wilder Rodrigues < WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I did not say that the issues are not VR related, because they are. What = I > said was to not try fixing it by calling the bash scripts form within the > python files. > > Those changes landed on master a few months ago, or more. The thing is > that most of us rely on the simulator and there was few people actually > testing them. We tested a lot, as much as we could at that time, but > unfortunately the effort did not cover all the cases. > > By the way, that=E2=80=99s not an excuse. We just lacked support from the > community before, which is actually being great now. > > From 6 blocker issues, 3 are VR related! > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Dashboard.jspa?selectPageId=3D12326= 765 > > 1 I already fixed, but cannot create a PR because master VPC router was > broken after the 9th September - which by the way, I have been > reporting/looking into since Friday. > > We have 52 PRs opened and few people reviewing them, I mean, really > reviewing. Most of the PRs haven=E2=80=99t been tested properly, which ca= uses pain > at the end. > > Now, if we want 4.6 out, without issues, let=E2=80=99s work together and = stop LGTM > PRs that do not contain: > > 1. Jira ticket > 2. Proper description of what it fixes/improves > 3. Unit and/or Integration tests > 4. And was tested > > After 4.6 our first priority should be to get a proper CI environment tha= t > not only run simulator, but also KVM - at least. > > my 0.20 cents > > Cheers, > Wilder > > > On 16 Sep 2015, at 06:54, Rajani Karuturi > wrote: > > I agree. Most of the blockers we see now are VR related. > > ~Rajani > > > > On 16-Sep-2015, at 10:15 am, Raja Pullela wrote= : > > I agree with jayapal, so far none of the BVTs for the hypervisors are at > 100% except for the simulator's. > Also, changes/refactoring some of the very core functionality such as VR > should be thought through and thoroughly tested before being pushed as th= e > impact will be huge and stabilization will take time. At this point we a= re > not sure what else is broken ??? > > Also, we should review/critic such changes to make sure we don't spend > time on it later on... > Please note that Travis tests passing at 100% cannot be taken as the basi= s > to think that the changes are good. > > my 2cents! > Raja > -----Original Message----- > From: Jayapal Reddy Uradi [mailto:jayapalreddy.uradi@citrix.com > ] > Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 9:46 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [BLOCKER] - Guest VMs are not getting IPs as the DHCP port i= s > not opened in VR > > Hi Wilder, > > CLOUDSTACK-8843 > This ticket is actually NOT regression. It is not implemented/tested for > the basic zone VR. > What I have observed in the VR refactor is that sanity testing of > components the code affects is not done. > Now we are spending time on fixing issues which were stable earlier. > > Thanks, > Jayapal > > > On 15-Sep-2015, at 6:55 pm, Wilder Rodrigues < > wrodrigues@schubergphilis.com >> wrote: > > Hi Jayapal, > > I would not suggest to move back to the sceptres, but focus on fixing and > for every fix test it very well so we get confidence. If we start calling > scripts com the python code it will have a huge chance to become a real > mess! > > Let=E2=80=99s stick to it and fix it and once it=E2=80=99s stable we can = discuss a > refactor of the thing from scratch - we already have some ideas. > > The most important point is: for everyone touching Java/Python code, > please test your changes before creating PRs or LGTM other=E2=80=99s comm= itters PRs. > > Cheers, > Wilder > > > On 15 Sep 2015, at 14:52, Jayapal Reddy Uradi < > jayapalreddy.uradi@citrix.com >> wrote: > > Wilder, That is true. > > All these issues are because of the VR refactoring. I don=E2=80=99t know = what are > the unit test cases run on VR refactor code. > VR (shell) scripts are stabilized over years and now suddenly moved to > new implementation. What we have figured out is that this new > implementation is done only partially. What I am suggesting now to move > ahead is to call the existing/old shell scripts in new implementation fo= r > configuring the VR to avoid spending time on unnecessary bugs. > With current implementation we may see many issues in production for some > time to come. > > Thanks, > Jayapal > > On 15-Sep-2015, at 5:57 pm, Wilder Rodrigues < > wrodrigues@schubergphilis.com >> wrote: > > I have the feeling that we are fixing 1 issue and created 2. > > Please, make sure the routers tests are executed and green before creatin= g > the PR. I will do the same. > > Cheers, > Wilder > > > On 15 Sep 2015, at 14:23, Jayapal Reddy Uradi < > jayapalreddy.uradi@citrix.com >> wrote: > > Assigned to myself. > > Thanks, > Jayapal > On 15-Sep-2015, at 2:49 pm, Raja Pullela mailto:raja.pullela@citrix.com >> wrote: > > Hi, > > JIRA - ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8843 > Can someone please pick up this ticket ? This is failing a bunch of the > BVTs tests in Basiczone. > > Thanks, > Raja > > > > > > > > --001a11c2cd9a6f59c4051fd85839--