13:01:55 #startmeeting 13:01:55 Meeting started Wed Apr 16 13:01:55 2014 UTC. The chair is alinefm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 13:01:55 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 13:01:55 #meetingname scrum 13:01:55 The meeting name has been set to 'scrum' 13:02:13 #info Agenda 1) Status 2) Open discussion 13:02:13 anything else? 13:04:49 Hi there? 13:04:57 hi royce 13:05:07 #topic Status 13:05:07 #info Please provide your status using the #info command: #info 13:05:24 Hi alinefm, how are you doing? 13:05:46 royce, good and you? 13:06:13 #info alinefm added mechanism to translate help pages 13:06:13 #info YuXin Edit Guest Network Interface, Patch V1 sent, need to discuss the interface model 13:06:30 #info rotru is working in new patches of "edit vm cpu/memory" feature 13:06:37 #info royce finished guest disks manage backend patch v1, merged ide support 4 disks patch, now working on the UI for disk manage slowly... 13:06:42 #info alinefm created API to add users/groups to the vms 13:06:49 Doing good, alinefm 13:07:15 #info alinefm now I am working on a API to list all system users and groups - it will be useful when user will update the vm users/groups from UI 13:08:13 #info shaohef send version API support. 13:09:59 great, team! 13:10:08 we still have a lot to do in a week 13:10:14 next week is the end of sprint 1 13:10:55 I still need to send a first version of history data view 13:11:04 I plan to do it by tomorrow 13:11:34 anyone has blockers? 13:12:51 anyonde has concerns about the time to deliver all tasks planned? 13:14:14 alinefm, me, I'm not familiar with js so I'm not sure I can finish the backend and frontend of manage guest disk in time 13:14:50 adamkingit, YuXin, hlwanghl, anyone can help royce on it? 13:15:12 hlwanghl gave me help on that, thanks to him 13:15:52 but since the backend is just on v1 13:16:09 royce, I will review your patches today 13:16:19 so you can get feedback soon 13:16:20 and I plan to submit v1 of UI tomorrow 13:16:25 Thanks alinefm 13:16:28 royce, good 13:16:47 I'll try my best 13:16:57 royce, I know =) 13:17:02 looking at the sprint plan, we have come completes to go 13:17:12 don't hesitate to ask help 13:17:27 https://github.com/kimchi-project/kimchi/wiki/Todo-1.2.1 13:17:47 #info danielhb submitted a 5th version of "kimchi must not run as root" with the FABULOUS help of alinefm . Patch is waiting for review/approval 13:18:17 danielhb, ;-) 13:19:19 adamkingit, yes 13:19:33 I'd like to see more patches on ML 13:19:51 maybe it can help us get all done in time 13:21:06 ok - let's move on to open discussion section 13:21:10 #topic Open Discussion 13:21:12 #info rotru investigated and helped to fix problems when create multiple templates 13:21:31 YuXin, do you want to discuss about the interface model? 13:21:45 yes 13:22:20 from shao he, I got to know that the backend only select a model that can work with all operating systems 13:22:37 it will not be the best, so user may need to update it 13:23:16 I suggest to reserve the model, but make the most compatible model to be defaut when create guest network interface 13:24:41 YuXin, by reserve do you mean keep showing it when creating the interface? 13:24:51 yes 13:25:21 make the most compatible one to be default option for model field 13:26:41 YuXin, ok 13:26:47 ok 13:26:51 shaohef, the default one will be virtio? 13:27:20 no 13:27:33 as far as I know, virtio only works for linux 13:28:06 YuXin, so which model will be the default? 13:28:07 just checked mail, default is rtl8139 13:28:17 ok 13:28:30 virtio is the best for linux, but will not work for windows 13:28:43 alinefm: no the default is not virtio. 13:28:47 YuXin, did you see my comment about the UI consistence ? to make storage and interface views similar 13:28:58 can we default based on detected OS? 13:29:29 update storage UI to make it consistent need to be in another patch 13:29:37 rtl8139 emulates a physical NIC. 13:29:41 I will check it tomorrow to figure out the design 13:29:48 virtio  is a para-virtualization NIC, high performance than an emulated physical NIC. 13:30:40 For the VM will not store any template information, after it is create. 13:30:40 The backend do not know which the model type is the best after we has install OS on VM. 13:31:05 we only know the best model type  when we create a VM. 13:31:05 That's because, the template tell us the guest OS and the best model for this OS. 13:31:43 shaohef, maybe would be good to store that info when creating the vm 13:31:51 and the objectstore 13:31:58 *in the objectstore 13:32:10 So has discussed with alinefm before, at last we let libvirt to choose a model for interface. 13:32:36 shaohef, it is also a good option 13:32:50 do you know the libvirt criterias to choose the model? 13:32:53 Will relying on objectstore impede vm migration? 13:33:13 alinefm: libvirt only choose rtl8139 13:33:33 I stored this info when creating vm for cdrom bus and disk bus too 13:33:45 alinefm: I can store the template information for VM 13:34:16 adamkingit, I don't think so 13:34:30 Or we cannot choose proper disk bus for a vm, especially when some vm's not creating on x86, the bus type's different 13:34:41 we already use the objectstore to store some vm info - like icon 13:34:57 Storing the template with the VM may break our mental model. The cookie doesn't change shape once cut, even if the cutter gets bent 13:35:48 hmm, I think that will be a problem for migration. At least consistency, unless we require a shared DB which we don't want 13:35:49 I stored distro and version not the template, shaohef do you need the same? 13:35:51 adamkingit, we will not store the all template info 13:35:56 YuXin, then what about if user reinstall OS on a guest. This new OS maybe different with the old one. 13:35:57 just the iface model 13:36:14 Can we store what we need in the vm definition metadata? 13:36:47 shaohef, correct, model will need to be updated 13:36:53 royce, and then you use osdistro to get the properly bus? 13:37:00 seems metadata is a option 13:37:05 that'll be a problem, shaohef 13:37:23 fuctonality will be limited if model is transparent to user 13:37:27 yes, alinefm, I used it as a suggestion if user not pass this info 13:37:35 pass the bus info 13:38:29 I feel like I need to see a picture. yuxin: would you take screenshots of the relevent screens, and just use OpenOffice to draw in the things you propose to change? 13:39:02 let me try to connect to my office desktop 13:40:31 how can paste screen-shot 13:41:24 let me send a mail to mail list 13:41:44 YuXin: http://picpaste.com 13:43:26 Guest Network Interface Design 13:43:28 check mail 13:44:46 mail sent failed 13:45:41 YuXin, I received it 13:46:05 shaohef, pretty slow to load kimchi-devel@ovirt.org 13:46:18 i got it 13:46:26 ok 13:47:10 so we choose a defualt model at VM create time based on what shuold be good for the installed guest OS, but we allow edits here in the event an override is needed? 13:48:30 adamkingit, we choose the default value which is rtl8139 13:48:37 independent of guest OS 13:48:53 ah, so we always default to rtl8139 13:49:04 making it more likely someone would want to change this? 13:49:27 virtio as default? 13:49:38 Is that the same for disk bus? IDE by default, this will disable hot plug 13:50:21 or virtio by default? 13:50:36 rtl8139 works for all OS, but not the best for a certain OS like linux 13:50:49 virtio is the best for linux but do not work for windows 13:51:04 perhaps we should choose virtio when we know its a linux vm 13:51:18 adamkingit, yes 13:51:24 and keep rtl8139 to windows 13:51:44 fall back to rtl8139 when we can't tell or we know its windows, unless there is a better chioce for windows too 13:51:59 shaohef, can you handle this at backend, then we can make model to be transparent to user 13:52:39 by tell os version is that mean we need to store it? or choose is let user choose it 13:53:27 We create the network when we create the VM. I don't think we would need to store it w/ the VM, only with the template 13:53:56 YuXin: sure. 13:54:05 adamkingit, we can add networks interfaces after vm is created 13:54:27 true, though we should already have 1 13:54:39 use the same model for 2-n? 13:54:46 ok, since backend can intelligently select for the best model, then I will remove model to make it transparent 13:54:59 adamkingit: yes. this is my first design. 13:55:06 :-) 13:55:17 YuXin, ok 13:55:39 shaohef, it is implemented that way? 13:55:50 Ok, I'm in that one 13:56:01 adamkingit: alinefm: I have send it to mail-list. 13:56:10 I'm on that one 13:56:19 alinefm: but later, you and me discuss this problem. we change it. 13:57:05 alinefm: for we decided to libvirt choose the model. 13:57:32 sounds like we since discovered libvirt does so much choose, as default to most common 13:57:33 alinefm: adamkingit: but I can change it. :) 13:57:49 **doesn't** 13:57:57 shaohef, do you remember why we decided to change? some special reason? 13:58:30 when all removed? 13:58:57 alinefm: a long time ago. I need to check the log. 14:00:28 shaohef, remember to add "update interface" api 14:01:06 royce, good point 14:01:32 when no interface exist, we lack of reference, then fall back to the emulated one 14:01:53 yes 14:01:59 shaohef, adamkingit, ^ what do you think? 14:02:01 or we could take your 1st suggestion and store the model in the metadata 14:03:20 alinefm: store in metadata? but when user re-install other OS different with tho older OS. 14:03:45 why would a user reinstall a VM instead of deleting it and creating a new one? 14:03:59 shaohef, royce, adamkingit, for power: nic_model='spapr-vlan' 14:04:38 adamkingit, keep /home intact? 14:05:10 adamkingit: we suggest to delete create a new one 14:05:15 which implies same type os? 14:06:18 adamkingit, no - you can have 2 partitions 14:06:30 1 for /home and other for linux itself 14:06:42 reinstall the linux partition keep /home intact 14:06:50 yes, but if you do that you aren't very likely to be installing windows on the 1st partition 14:07:11 And upgrade? 14:07:36 like upgrade a old model linux to a model one 14:07:57 moden 14:08:04 would a change in linux versions indicate a need to change the network model? 14:08:28 yes 14:08:32 in some times 14:09:04 adamkingit, because some qemu/kernel lack of full virtio support, we use emulated one 14:09:05 from vm xml we can get the arch: 14:09:09 14:09:09 hvm 14:09:09 14:09:09 14:09:21 that way we can differ power and X systems 14:09:23 royce: in src/kimchi/osinfo.py 14:09:29 right, shaohef 14:09:46 modern_spec = dict(common_spec, disk_bus='virtio', nic_model='virtio') 14:10:04 modern_spec is virtio 14:10:35 ok, so based on what is installed at the time we can choose something that will work well for that installation 14:11:03 if the user chooses to install a diff OS inside the VM, then we may no longer have the optimal chioce 14:11:54 adamkingit, are you saying to store os/version and based on that get the proper model? 14:12:23 I WAS, but I think you changed my mind... 14:12:30 hehehe 14:12:33 why? 14:12:50 We know enough at the template level to choose the right model when we create the VM 14:13:25 IF the user chooses to reinstall teh OS inside the VM, we may not have the optimal model 14:13:52 but if the user deletes the VM and creates a new one from a diff template we are back in the land of the good 14:15:11 I think reinstall OS will be quite rare 14:15:29 so I think you talked me into: we store the network model in the metadata at VM create timem and we use that choice whenever creating new networks for a VM 14:16:13 adamkingit, but in a reinstall the metadata is lost with the network model 14:16:22 hehheh 14:16:50 in this case back to the default? virtio for linux and rtl8139 for win? 14:17:08 alinefm: The VM metadata shouldnt be affected by what happens INSIDE the VM 14:17:09 royce, we are talking and always block in same point 14:17:12 hehehe 14:17:49 template_specs = {'x86': {'old': dict(common_spec, disk_bus='ide', 14:17:49 nic_model='e1000', sound_model='ich6'), 14:18:12 adamkingit, good point =) 14:18:20 and the same for the networks interfaces 14:18:21 not sure which is better rtl8139 and e1000. they are both emulate nic. 14:18:38 reinstall will not remove them 14:18:58 so the guest would come up on the same networks it was on before 14:19:32 adamkingit, but we need metadata to know which model to use when user deletes all networks interfaces 14:20:06 which is where I was proposing we choose the network model when we create the VM, and store that info in metadata 14:20:34 I am OK with it 14:20:37 shaohef, royce ^ 14:20:38 ? 14:20:44 +1 14:21:06 I'm Ok 14:22:19 I think we have been in circles a bit because we are trying to combine 2 things into one simple concept 14:22:43 virtually 14:22:45 1)what kind of, and how many NICs are in the machine 14:23:03 2) What networks are those cards connected to. 14:23:21 In the physical world, you open the case and put a card in a slot for 1 14:23:43 and you put a cable from the card to some switch 14:24:21 I think we arrived at an acceptable simplification, which we hope works for people 14:24:45 yeap - it was good discussion 14:24:52 shaohef, are you going to address it on backend? 14:25:14 If we learn that people really want to control those 2 things sepaately, we can revisit 14:25:39 alinefm: yes. 14:25:39 shaohef, in my patches to add users/groups to vms I used the metadata tag but I always rebuild it 14:25:43 need to update it as well 14:25:58 to only update the element 14:26:29 ok 14:26:35 let's finish for today 14:26:52 if anyone has more topics I will be here 14:27:00 I will just end the meeting 14:27:05 thanks all for joining 14:27:09 #endmeeting