| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-cyborg - 2018-10-17 | |||
| 14:15:04 | shaohe_feng | #info shaohe_feng_ | |
| 14:15:07 | Li_Liu_ | did I miss anything? | |
| 14:15:17 | Li_Liu_ | Hi shaohe | |
| 14:15:23 | shaohe_feng | morning Li_Liu_ | |
| 14:15:47 | wangzhh | SundarMaybe this morning for you. | |
| 14:16:19 | xinran | #info xinran | |
| 14:16:24 | xinran | Hi all | |
| 14:16:38 | Sundar | wangzhh: OK. I haven't got it yet. I see your new patch set and responses. Thanks. | |
| 14:16:41 | wangzhh | Hi, xinran shaohe. | |
| 14:18:16 | Li_Liu | back again.. | |
| 14:18:38 | Li_Liu | are we gonna merge Xinran's spec? | |
| 14:18:47 | Li_Liu | does it still depend on anything? | |
| 14:18:51 | Sundar | Li_Liu: Re. Glance client, I gave some reviews. Wondering why can't we just call Glance client directly? Do we need a wrapper? | |
| 14:19:09 | Sundar | Li_Liu: which spec? | |
| 14:19:20 | xinran | Li_Liu: | |
| 14:19:28 | Li_Liu | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/597991/ | |
| 14:20:23 | xinran | Li_Liu: I have discussed with Sundar offline, the current solution after PTG is different with this one. | |
| 14:20:24 | Li_Liu | Sundar, of course, but I just wanna do it similar to Nova --> created a wrapper API for it | |
| 14:20:52 | Li_Liu | xinran: any plan on updating it? | |
| 14:22:15 | Li_Liu | did I drop? | |
| 14:22:24 | Li_Liu | ah.. i am good :) | |
| 14:22:29 | xinran | Sundar has a new spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/603955/ in nova community | |
| 14:22:49 | Li_Liu | xinran, so that one will replace yours right? | |
| 14:23:04 | shaohe_feng | hi wangzhh | |
| 14:23:33 | xinran | yes in the future | |
| 14:23:49 | wangzhh | Didn't get the review email about this patch... | |
| 14:24:07 | shaohe_feng | seems I miss something | |
| 14:24:24 | shaohe_feng | something wrong with my net. | |
| 14:24:52 | shaohe_feng | no any message on the screen for a long time. | |
| 14:25:15 | Sundar | Thanks, Xinran. All, please review https://review.openstack.org/608624 . That is the proposed implementation (high-level design) of Cyborg APIs for Nova | |
| 14:25:43 | xinran | but you guys can use https://review.openstack.org/#/c/596187/ this API if it's urgent. It can works with nova, but of course need change code on nova side. | |
| 14:26:40 | Li_Liu__ | Sundar, could you help me run the meeting for now... my connection is so bad | |
| 14:26:53 | Li_Liu__ | I am going through all the patches in https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open%20project:openstack/cyborg | |
| 14:26:58 | wangzhh | xinran: So this patch should be abandoned? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/597991/ | |
| 14:27:06 | Sundar | Li_Liu: Sure. NP. | |
| 14:29:00 | Sundar | Xinran: On https://review.openstack.org/#/c/601150/, this patch tries to create RP trees from the agent, IIUC. It is better to do it from the conductor | |
| 14:29:08 | Sundar | for the reasons we have discussed in the past | |
| 14:29:35 | Sundar | Also, it is desirable to have all db access from the conductor (and not from the agent) | |
| 14:29:52 | xinran | Hmmm, Sundar do you wanna continue work on this spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/597991/ or you prefer to create a new one? | |
| 14:30:40 | Sundar | Xinran, I think this spec should be dropped -- that is a better use of your time and energy :) | |
| 14:31:01 | shaohe_feng | why dropped? | |
| 14:31:31 | Sundar | Shaohe: I already explained in the reviews. Basically, this is not in line with the Nova flow at all | |
| 14:32:03 | shaohe_feng | A patch is not perfect, every reviewers should give his comments and let the auther to improve it. | |
| 14:32:09 | shaohe_feng | that's the rule | |
| 14:32:30 | Sundar | I gave my comments | |
| 14:33:23 | Sundar | Think about how this even relates to the Nova spec | |
| 14:34:08 | shaohe_feng | so the summary of new cyborg design: | |
| 14:34:32 | shaohe_feng | 1. split the nova flavor to device profile | |
| 14:34:57 | shaohe_feng | 2. change the accelerator api to var api. | |
| 14:34:59 | xinran | Sundar: I can modify this spec according to your nova spec if you want once your spec is merged. | |
| 14:35:00 | shaohe_feng | right? | |
| 14:35:48 | xinran | Sundar: or you prefer to write a new one by yourself? | |
| 14:36:05 | Sundar | Xinran, Shaohe: we need to start with the Cyborg API signatures proposed for Nova, and work downwards into the details. That is what we do in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/608624/ | |
| 14:36:51 | shaohe_feng | what is signatures? | |
| 14:37:34 | Sundar | Shaohe: API parameters, responses, HTTP return codes | |
| 14:38:53 | Sundar | Shahe: re. your question about 2 parts, the device profiles are an important part. So is the whole flow about creating VARs in an unbound state, then binding them, then attaching. | |
| 14:40:23 | Sundar | Aso, the device model where we map deployables to RPs, as we discussed last week | |
| 14:41:10 | shaohe_feng | I do not care you name is var or accelerator. | |
| 14:41:35 | Sundar | A VAR is not an accelerator. | |
| 14:41:54 | shaohe_feng | but as user var is puzzle, like vport. | |
| 14:42:35 | shaohe_feng | var is used for a choose a device to bind to a VM. | |
| 14:42:35 | Sundar | "var is puzzle" -- what does that mean? | |
| 14:43:43 | Sundar | A VAR is a Virtual Accelerator Request. It abstracts the state of the request, starting from user requirements, moving on to the Nova's selection of an alloc cand with device RPs, and then Cyborg bindings | |
| 14:43:54 | shaohe_feng | any project, you seen they expose a var object to user? | |
| 14:43:58 | Sundar | This is conceptually different from what we had before the PTG | |
| 14:44:10 | shaohe_feng | vport, vvolume? | |
| 14:44:38 | Li_Liu_ | shaohe, are you more concern with the naming or the concept? | |
| 14:44:56 | shaohe_feng | the initial design, is Request a Accelerator to VM. | |
| 14:45:33 | shaohe_feng | but we does not name it virtual accelerator, we just named it accelerator | |
| 14:45:40 | shaohe_feng | no need to use virtual | |
| 14:45:52 | Sundar | Shaohe: is this about names, or concepts? | |
| 14:46:27 | shaohe_feng | no need to emphasize virtual | |
| 14:46:41 | shaohe_feng | you can discuss with Li_Liu_ about the accelerator history | |
| 14:46:43 | shaohe_feng | about the name | |
| 14:46:48 | Li_Liu_ | I think "virtual" word indeed confuses a bit | |
| 14:47:00 | wangzhh | Shaohe: Accelerator is not same as VAR. Maybe u confusion about them? | |
| 14:47:46 | Li_Liu_ | but I agree it's different from concept of accelerator | |
| 14:48:32 | Sundar | Neutron has something called a VIF -- virtual interface. The word 'virtual' is used in many contexts. I don't understand the issue. | |
| 14:50:23 | Li_Liu_ | I guess when you put all of these virtual accelerator / accelerator request / virtual accelerator request together. that's where the confusion starts | |
| 14:51:34 | Li_Liu_ | Sundar, does nova needs to care if a accelerator is virtual or not? | |
| 14:51:43 | Sundar | Li_Liu: We have accelerators and we have VARs. Former is a resource represented in Placement. VAR, as you said, is different -- it is a request for an accelerator -- not known to Placement. There are only 2 things | |
| 14:52:12 | wangzhh | I think it's better to have a clear definition of VAR. In the doc, for other developer or users. | |
| 14:52:39 | wangzhh | Sundar: Agree. | |
| 14:52:42 | Sundar | Li_Liu: Accelerators are resource class inventories -- they are not physical hardware, even in the previous Rocky proposal | |
| 14:53:41 | Sundar | Li_Liu: AFAIK, we never used the term 'virtual accelerator' to refer to an accelerator. | |
| 14:54:27 | Li_Liu_ | I know, I think Cyborg maybe should hide physical/virtual accelerator concept from nova. | |
| 14:54:47 | Li_Liu_ | or can we rename it to Accelerator Virtual Request | |
| 14:55:11 | Li_Liu_ | as, according to you, the request is virtual but not the accelerator? | |
| 14:55:18 | shaohe_feng | accelerator is OK. | |
| 14:55:51 | shaohe_feng | and Request is verb | |
| 14:56:03 | Li_Liu_ | shaohe_feng, we do have accelerator, but sunder needs something different to work with placement | |
| 14:56:23 | Sundar | Li_Liu: yes, the request is virtual. If we just call it an Accelerator Request, say ARQ or something, are you ok with that? | |
| 14:56:34 | shaohe_feng | Request and be apply to a noun accelerator | |
| 14:56:57 | shaohe_feng | Request can be apply to a noun accelerator | |
| 14:57:26 | shaohe_feng | this is not conflict with RESTFUL style. | |
| 14:57:53 | Sundar | Li_Liu: "hide physical/virtual accelerator" Please note that the term 'accelerator' never refers to any physical entity :) | |
| 14:58:50 | Sundar | In Placement, an accelerator type is a resource class (e.g. CUSTOM_ACCELERATOR_FPGA). There are number of resources of one RC in a single RP | |
| 14:58:52 | wangzhh | Sundar, could u explain the differences between Acc and VAR? I just know parts of them. I think shaohe is confused about them. | |
| 14:58:52 | Li_Liu_ | ARQ is kinda cool to me | |
| 14:59:06 | Sundar | So, it is just a number that Placement is counting as RC inventory | |