Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-cyborg - 2017-11-08
15:41:03 jkilpatr nope haven't read it, care to summarize?
15:41:12 zhipeng we could implement it later, but I think I should submit a spec about it
15:41:18 zhipeng so in a gist
15:41:33 jkilpatr link me when you have it up
15:41:36 zhipeng currently Placement uses Resource Provider to model resources
15:42:19 zhipeng which consists of two dimensions: traits on the quantative side of things, and resource class for the qualitive side of things
15:42:45 zhipeng e.g. you could use trait to define what you have and resource class for how much/many you have
15:43:00 zhipeng however, i think for cyborg to deal with accelerator
15:43:15 zhipeng purely enumeration would cause problems
15:43:26 zhipeng since for example for FPGAs
15:43:44 zhipeng you can't trait and resource class with every VF/PF combination/layout
15:43:50 jkilpatr where you have possible traits that consume the same resource class?
15:44:13 jkilpatr zhipeng, I would have a resource class fpga that was consumed by many traits which would be the VF/PF
15:44:35 zhipeng jkilpatr my point is that many traits would be really hard to manage
15:45:02 zhipeng we need a more fuzzy way to describe accelerator resource, besides traits and resource class
15:45:26 jkilpatr what do you propose
15:45:34 zhipeng so I think propably something like capability, that it could generally map to a set of resource that user would need
15:45:50 zhipeng instead of specifically id the resource
15:46:01 zhipeng for example for deep learning
15:46:25 zhipeng there will be cases that operators just want to run their framworks on OpenStack Infra
15:46:44 zhipeng doesn't really care about which GPU, FPGA, SoC solution it should use
15:47:15 zhipeng and then if say, the infra got some GPU good for temporalachitecture
15:47:36 zhipeng and some FPGA cards that good for spatial architecture
15:48:00 jkilpatr but we need to get more specific at some point?
15:48:03 zhipeng we should just label these like CAPABILITY: DL/TEM
15:48:15 zhipeng we will still have traits ands resource class
15:48:17 jkilpatr the way I see it we can just map a buncha traits to the same resource and it will be kinda ugly but work.
15:48:30 zhipeng ye that is what I think
15:48:56 zhipeng so my thought was that if we could add another dimension, to use with trait and resource class together
15:49:06 zhipeng so that operators could do a specific request
15:49:10 zhipeng or a fuzzy request
15:49:34 zhipeng because unlike the general computing infras, which could almost be enumerated
15:49:44 zhipeng accelerators just got so many types and combinations
15:50:09 jkilpatr so we let operators aggregate things when their workload could run on either and schedule agains that?
15:50:32 jkilpatr against*
15:51:06 zhipeng not necessarily aggreagating, but just select a (super/sub) set of resource that satisfy the fuzzy request
15:51:24 zhipeng if it deems to be a super set, then it is aggregation
15:51:43 zhipeng if it just needs a subset, say just some of the FPGA card funcationalities
15:51:53 zhipeng we could also do that mitigation
15:52:07 jkilpatr still not sure I understand the usecase
15:52:26 zhipeng I think I will just writeup a spec and we could review it :P
15:52:40 jkilpatr sure, a better outline of the potential usecase would help a ton
15:52:40 zhipeng I need to elaborate more
15:52:44 zhipeng yep
15:52:50 zhipeng okey
15:53:29 zhipeng #agreed have weekly sprint video conf using team meeting timeslot starting Nov 15th
15:53:47 zhipeng #topic AoB
15:54:02 zhipeng I think we have covered the most important ones
15:54:07 zhipeng any other business ?
15:58:54 zhipeng okey let's conclude the meeting then, thanks everyone :)
15:58:59 zhipeng #endmeeting
15:59:00 openstack Meeting ended Wed Nov 8 15:58:59 2017 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
15:59:01 openstack Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_cyborg/2017/openstack_cyborg.2017-11-08-15.01.html
15:59:02 openstack Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_cyborg/2017/openstack_cyborg.2017-11-08-15.01.txt
15:59:03 openstack Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_cyborg/2017/openstack_cyborg.2017-11-08-15.01.log.html
#openstack-cyborg - 2017-11-13
13:27:24 jkilpatr zhipengh[m], so the agent can't interact with placement well IMO. Each agent is on each compute and knows only about it's own local resources. If we want the agent to go and tell Nova 'hey we have N of these devices' it needs to know global state
13:27:27 jkilpatr which is the job of the conductor.
13:27:52 jkilpatr Otherwise we assume that no two computes will have the same type of accelerator, which is fatally flawed IMO
13:41:21 zhipengh[m] Does it have to know the global state ?
13:42:05 zhipengh[m] Currently for Nova, it is the Nova compute you n each node interacting with Placement, as far as I understand
#openstack-cyborg - 2017-11-15
08:03:17 masber good afternoon, I just found you project, is cybord ready to be installed?
08:04:05 masber I would like to be able to use FPGAs on openstack, can I get some help within this channel?
08:21:59 zhipengh[m] Hi masber , thx for the interest !
08:22:24 zhipengh[m] Could u introduce a little bit about yourself and your requirement ?
08:22:34 masber oh yes sorry
08:22:48 masber I work for a medical research intitute
08:23:09 masber and we are playing with openstack/ceph in order to see if it can fit out use cases
08:23:20 masber now we are doing a project with intel
08:23:35 masber and we will borrow some FPGA cards from them
08:24:16 zhipengh[m] That sounds interesting :)
08:24:47 masber I would like to see if we can make those cards to work on openstack, I mean been able to access the FPGAs from the instance
08:24:55 masber I did a talk in the openstack summit in sydney
08:25:13 masber I talk about what we do etc
08:25:49 masber I am not an openstack expert just, installed it and played with it a little bit
08:26:23 masber but now with these FPGAs coming I feel I should start getting my hands dirty
08:26:40 zhipengh[m] Cool ! Can you provide the title of your Sydney topic ? So that I could search on youtube :)
08:26:46 zhipengh[m] As for cyborg
08:27:07 masber so, if I am not mistaken we are receiving some nallatech 385a
08:27:16 zhipengh[m] Our current code base cannot function yet, and we are undergoing active development
08:27:40 masber the name of the talk was "building a genome future with openstack"
08:28:04 masber https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSAJpAxORAw
08:28:10 zhipengh[m] I will definitely check it out :)
08:28:52 masber it is quite basic talk
08:28:55 zhipengh[m] So at the moment you could run up the three main cyborg processes, but no function yet
08:29:02 masber I see
08:29:12 zhipengh[m] We are now try to define data models
08:29:24 zhipengh[m] And would be great to have input from you
08:29:34 zhipengh[m] For example on FPGA
08:29:58 masber ok, I am not an user with lots of expertise on these kind of things, but happy to give it a go
08:30:05 zhipengh[m] What is your main use case for that and what would you like to see FPGA resource represented
08:30:25 zhipengh[m] That'd be great !
08:30:31 masber this is to run a tool called GATK4
08:30:53 masber it is a best practice set of tools to run genome analysis
08:31:05 masber so this tool can work on HPC or in a SPARK cluster
08:31:25 masber our goal is to see how much efficiency we can get by running these tools on FPGAs
08:31:40 masber compared to running on Apache Spark
08:32:25 masber the thing is I am receiving the cards tomorrow from the intel guy who is coming from overseas (not sure from singapose, china or US)
08:32:32 masber *singapore
08:32:48 masber and I am not sure for how long I can keep the cards either
08:33:05 zhipengh[m] that is very interesting

Earlier   Later