| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-cyborg - 2020-06-30 | |||
| 02:32:03 | openstackgerrit | Wenping Song proposed openstack/cyborg master: Add instance project_id for arq https://review.opendev.org/738427 | |
| #openstack-cyborg - 2020-07-01 | |||
| 07:40:24 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/cyborg-specs master: Remove .placeholder https://review.opendev.org/723792 | |
| 07:41:11 | openstackgerrit | Wenping Song proposed openstack/cyborg-specs master: Add Inspur® FPGA driver specification. https://review.opendev.org/730760 | |
| 07:49:48 | openstackgerrit | Wenping Song proposed openstack/cyborg-specs master: Add Inspur® FPGA driver specification. https://review.opendev.org/730760 | |
| 13:50:07 | openstackgerrit | wangzhh proposed openstack/cyborg-specs master: Add Attribute API specification. https://review.opendev.org/738331 | |
| #openstack-cyborg - 2020-07-02 | |||
| 03:01:32 | Yumeng | hi s_shogo,s_shogo,brinzhang_ | |
| 03:01:44 | s_shogo | Hi Yumeng | |
| 03:02:08 | Yumeng | hi songwenping__ | |
| 03:02:18 | Yumeng | s_shogo: how are you doing? | |
| 03:02:18 | brinzhang_ | hi Yumeng | |
| 03:02:20 | songwenping__ | Hi Yumeng | |
| 03:03:02 | Yumeng | let's wait a few minutes for others to join.^^ | |
| 03:04:33 | s_shogo | Yumeng Good, thank you. | |
| 03:04:59 | songwenping__ | Yumeng: should we add the specification to the storyboard from now on? | |
| 03:05:09 | Yumeng | xinran and chenker have meeting conflicts, let's get started! | |
| 03:05:10 | openstack | Meeting started Thu Jul 2 03:05:10 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is Yumeng. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | |
| 03:05:10 | Yumeng | #startmeeting openstack-cyborg | |
| 03:05:11 | openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | |
| 03:05:13 | openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'openstack_cyborg' | |
| 03:05:59 | Yumeng | songwenping__: that's can be done automatically by gerrit. you just need to add story:story-id, task:task-id to commit message of your patch. | |
| 03:07:35 | Yumeng | here is a reference: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cyborg/CyborgStoryboard | |
| 03:08:40 | songwenping__ | So what's the meaning of doing this? I donot think we should record it in the storyboard again. | |
| 03:10:12 | Yumeng | you can track either in cyborg-spec storyboard or the feature storyboard, but need somewhere to track. | |
| 03:10:59 | Yumeng | we had a storyboard cyborg-spec, which I personally agree if we don't need, we can remove. | |
| 03:11:53 | brinzhang_ | Any topic need to discuss? today | |
| 03:12:03 | Yumeng | but for the specification, I think need a place to record together with the feature code. | |
| 03:12:55 | brinzhang_ | In QAT, SSD, FPGA, and add device attribute API, I had left some comment, I have nothing to say before get the respone. | |
| 03:13:04 | Yumeng | I have a question, what do you think of third-party CI about the driver that your are going to submit? | |
| 03:13:13 | brinzhang_ | In the specs of QAT, SSD, FPGA, and add device attribute API,... | |
| 03:13:25 | songwenping__ | Thanks Yumeng. | |
| 03:13:57 | brinzhang_ | Yuemng: We have not the hard device to support the 3rd CI, would you like to provide? | |
| 03:14:03 | Yumeng | shaohe and I had a discussion with sean about mdev, he suggested a good way of mdev first-party CI:http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-June/015696.html | |
| 03:15:53 | brinzhang_ | I had seen this ML, I have not looked into, will see later | |
| 03:16:02 | Yumeng | I mean, the Inspur FPGA driver and Inspur NVME SSD which you are plannig to submit. If you don't have ,I'm more impossible to have. :( | |
| 03:16:16 | brinzhang_ | just saw you response in the ML | |
| 03:16:34 | Yumeng | http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-June/subject.html | |
| 03:16:40 | Yumeng | here is more. | |
| 03:17:17 | brinzhang_ | yeah, we dont have server to support the CI evn in project planning, hope you can understand. | |
| 03:17:35 | Yumeng | maybe that will inspirs you any new ideas. | |
| 03:18:02 | brinzhang_ | Yumeng: but we can show the test results on the implements patch, should not limit the spec go | |
| 03:20:03 | Yumeng | I understand. We need thinking the third-party CI or any other workarounds, since that's a topic asked by other projects several times. | |
| 03:20:15 | brinzhang_ | Yumeng: I can understand this, but I feel helpless to provide 3rd-party CI. | |
| 03:20:49 | brinzhang_ | Yes, this requires hardware support. I think this is not just a problem we encountered at Cyborg. | |
| 03:21:34 | Yumeng | don't have to be a very serious 3rd-party CI. I think the main concern from others should be if that driver really works? or things like that | |
| 03:22:27 | brinzhang_ | If the contributor can provide a complete test report, I think it is acceptable, what do you think? | |
| 03:23:03 | brinzhang_ | maybe we shuold mark the driver lack of it's CI to run | |
| 03:23:26 | Yumeng | brinzhang_: makes sense to me! | |
| 03:24:18 | brinzhang_ | Yuemng: thanks, this is a better way I can think of. | |
| 03:24:19 | Yumeng | we publish these kind of report to potential customers (either in documentation or other ways) | |
| 03:25:53 | shaohe_feng | Hi all | |
| 03:26:07 | brinzhang_ | we publish these kind of report to potential customers (either in documentation or other ways) | |
| 03:26:11 | Yumeng | hi shaohe_feng | |
| 03:26:11 | songwenping__ | His shaohe. | |
| 03:26:35 | shaohe_feng | conflict with another meeting, sorry for late | |
| 03:26:41 | brinzhang_ | we can left comment under the under the code to implement SPEC. | |
| 03:27:28 | brinzhang_ | Two ways: one is provide the 3rd-party CI; another is proivder the complete test report for the target driver. | |
| 03:28:22 | songwenping__ | brinzhang_: What is the complete test report like? | |
| 03:29:07 | Yumeng | shaohe_feng: no worries. we were discussing if we need third-party CI for new drivers in this release. | |
| 03:29:47 | shaohe_feng | got it, thanks. | |
| 03:30:43 | brinzhang_ | The report should show the driver can run successfully, may contain each api requst/response test result | |
| 03:31:54 | Yumeng | agree. That makes sense to me now. I cannot think of any better idea for now. | |
| 03:32:02 | songwenping__ | Can u provide a template? | |
| 03:32:05 | brinzhang_ | or others result you can provide, should let the reviewer can know it's a better driver | |
| 03:32:56 | brinzhang_ | Each driver is implemented differently and cannot provide templates. Provide a test list yourself if possible. | |
| 03:33:13 | Yumeng | I think nova operations like creation, deletion are very important | |
| 03:34:36 | brinzhang_ | nova-cyborg interaction is not a mandatory requirement, and may not be called through nova. | |
| 03:35:06 | brinzhang_ | But if used, it is best to provide. | |
| 03:36:14 | Yumeng | if we have third-party CI, that's a mandatory I suppose | |
| 03:37:08 | Yumeng | current tempest only test fake driver. third-party CI test real driver. | |
| 03:37:31 | brinzhang_ | yeah, can as soon as possiable to provider the nova operaction | |
| 03:37:54 | Yumeng | so from my understanding, test report will be a make up for third-party CI. | |
| 03:38:44 | Yumeng | I can bring up a ML thread to discuss this. | |
| 03:39:22 | brinzhang_ | Yuemng: You can | |
| 03:39:33 | Yumeng | Is there any other things want to bring up for today? | |
| 03:40:17 | Yumeng | I was testing rbac policy API, will soon submit the patches. | |
| 03:40:39 | brinzhang_ | Yuemng: cool, ths | |
| 03:40:47 | brinzhang_ | Yumeng, songwenping_, shaohe_feng: I have to go now, bye~ | |
| 03:41:02 | Yumeng | if nothing else, let's wrap up today's meeting | |
| 03:41:04 | shaohe_feng | brinzhang_ bye, have a good day | |
| 03:41:12 | songwenping__ | bye | |
| 03:41:15 | Yumeng | bye | |
| 03:41:21 | shaohe_feng | Yumeng, I'd like to talk about program | |
| 03:41:29 | Yumeng | ok. sure. | |
| 03:41:33 | Yumeng | please go ahead. | |
| 03:41:41 | shaohe_feng | Now it will take about one hour for us to program FPGA. | |
| 03:42:29 | Yumeng | sounds like a long time. | |
| 03:42:29 | shaohe_feng | and I find the program API will report timeout | |
| 03:42:42 | shaohe_feng | yes, a long time | |
| 03:43:15 | s_shogo | shaohe_feng : I would like to know the FPGA spec , e.g. Arria10 GX | |
| 03:43:26 | shaohe_feng | the client wait for the API response and receive the timeout | |
| 03:43:37 | shaohe_feng | s_shogo: yes it is A10 | |
| 03:43:48 | shaohe_feng | s_shogo: but we do not program the PR | |
| 03:44:09 | shaohe_feng | we program the whole flash. | |
| 03:44:35 | s_shogo | ok, I got it. It seems to be similar to N3000 case. | |
| 03:44:40 | shaohe_feng | for PR takes so many logic units | |
| 03:44:53 | shaohe_feng | s_shogo: yes, it is N3000 | |
| 03:45:36 | shaohe_feng | It really take too long time:') | |
| 03:45:51 | shaohe_feng | can we support async program? | |
| 03:46:07 | s_shogo | I know, that takes 25-40min :) | |
| 03:46:52 | s_shogo | IMO, supporting for async program needs modification for driver, agent, and so on . That is big task. | |