| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-cyborg - 2018-05-09 | |||
| 14:55:43 | NokMikeR | I reported the same problem many moons ago, but have not tried lately to install it | |
| 14:56:31 | zhipeng | NokMikeR i think during some of the past fixes it turns out ok | |
| 14:56:42 | zhipeng | i'm not sure if some of the recent patches breaks it | |
| 14:57:45 | NokMikeR | the mutable config page shows a failure? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/559303/ | |
| 14:58:08 | shaohe_ | ping | |
| 14:58:23 | zhipeng | hey welcome back | |
| 14:58:25 | NokMikeR | pong | |
| 14:58:32 | zhipeng | NokMikeR that should be already fixed | |
| 14:58:38 | NokMikeR | ok | |
| 15:00:09 | zhipeng | so the specific problem is c-cond and c-agent are not running | |
| 15:00:24 | zhipeng | shaohe_ that is not normal right / | |
| 15:00:55 | shaohe_ | yes. | |
| 15:01:23 | zhipeng | if devstack succeed | |
| 15:01:38 | zhipeng | c-api, c-cond, c-agent should all be running right ? | |
| 15:01:38 | shaohe_ | devstack should report error, if c-cond and c-agent are not running | |
| 15:02:24 | zhipeng | ok i will contact the author | |
| 15:02:28 | zhipeng | okey moving on | |
| 15:03:18 | zhipeng | #topic spec review day | |
| 15:03:28 | shaohe_ | it should be cyborg-agent, cyborg-api, cyborg-cond | |
| 15:03:38 | zhipeng | nova and other team all have this custom of spec sprint, or runways | |
| 15:03:43 | zhipeng | let's have one as well | |
| 15:03:51 | zhipeng | shaohe_ ok I will let him know | |
| 15:04:08 | zhipeng | #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/cyborg-rocky-spec-day | |
| 15:04:12 | shaohe_ | is c-xxx cinder process? | |
| 15:04:25 | zhipeng | maybe he just referred wrong | |
| 15:04:31 | zhipeng | I should double check with him | |
| 15:04:48 | shaohe_ | yes | |
| 15:05:34 | zhipeng | okey back to topic | |
| 15:06:26 | zhipeng | let's start with the "old ones" :) | |
| 15:06:33 | zhipeng | we should be ready to land those | |
| 15:07:06 | zhipeng | first up | |
| 15:07:09 | zhipeng | #info python-cyborgclient framework | |
| 15:07:19 | zhipeng | #link https://review.openstack.org/565023 | |
| 15:07:35 | zhipeng | shaohe_ mentioned the client code is actually ready, so let's land this one | |
| 15:07:40 | zhipeng | any objections ? | |
| 15:07:48 | Li_Liu | agree, I think we can merge that one | |
| 15:07:54 | sundar | I think the syntax is not quite in line? | |
| 15:08:05 | Li_Liu | just finished reviewing | |
| 15:08:15 | sundar | Other commands are like 'openstack server ...' where the 2nd argument is the object on which an action is applied | |
| 15:08:50 | sundar | Whereas we are proposing 'openstack acceleration ...' I saw Shaohe respond to my comment. | |
| 15:09:18 | sundar | It is not clear to me why we cannot have 'openstack acelerator <list/show/...>' | |
| 15:09:54 | NokMikeR | wondering why its not openstack cyborg list/show ? | |
| 15:09:57 | zhipeng | because accelerator more like an object that we will choose to act upon | |
| 15:10:06 | zhipeng | NokMikeR legal issue | |
| 15:10:12 | NokMikeR | ok | |
| 15:10:32 | sundar | NokMikeR: Just as we have 'openstack server ..' instead of 'openstack nova ' | |
| 15:10:45 | shaohe_ | cyborg is project name, acceleration is service type. | |
| 15:10:46 | edleafe | yeah - project names should be avoided | |
| 15:11:00 | NokMikeR | clarified thanks. | |
| 15:11:14 | Li_Liu | that's good to know :) | |
| 15:11:42 | sundar | shaohe: It is not clear to me why we cannot have 'openstack accelerator <list/show/...>' | |
| 15:12:03 | zhipeng | sundar see my above comment | |
| 15:12:09 | zhipeng | because accelerator more like an object that we will choose to act upon | |
| 15:12:24 | zhipeng | acceleration is a type of service, like server service, volume service | |
| 15:12:46 | sundar | zhipeng, yes. Like server/image etc. shouldn't it be the 2nd arg? | |
| 15:12:54 | zhipeng | we might have something like openstack acceleration fpga create | |
| 15:13:15 | zhipeng | shaohe_ correct me if I'm wrong | |
| 15:13:32 | shaohe_ | yes. I have look other project. | |
| 15:13:48 | shaohe_ | they do use this syntax | |
| 15:14:01 | shaohe_ | some use this syntax | |
| 15:14:07 | NokMikeR | is it command(create) then object(fpga) ? | |
| 15:15:05 | NokMikeR | openstack [<global-options>] <object-1> <action> [<object-2>] [<command-arguments>] | |
| 15:15:25 | shaohe_ | yes as NokMikeR suggestion | |
| 15:15:37 | zhipeng | NokMikeR yes the example i mentioned might not be strictly correct :P | |
| 15:15:40 | shaohe_ | global-options can be service type | |
| 15:16:12 | shaohe_ | for cyborg the service type is acceleration. | |
| 15:16:29 | shaohe_ | for cinder the service type is volume | |
| 15:16:43 | edleafe | #link openstackclient guidelines: https://docs.openstack.org/python-openstackclient/3.4.1/humaninterfaceguide.html#command-structure | |
| 15:16:44 | shaohe_ | for glance the service type is image | |
| 15:16:47 | sundar | shaohe: May be I still have a disconnect. :) "openstack [<global-options>] <object-1> <action> [<object-2>] [<command-arguments>]" Where is the service here? | |
| 15:17:11 | edleafe | sundar: object-1 | |
| 15:18:06 | sundar | So, we will have syntax like 'openstack acceleration create <object-2> ...' | |
| 15:18:49 | zhipeng | something like that | |
| 15:18:52 | shaohe_ | openstack network --help |less | |
| 15:18:52 | sundar | If everybody else is ok with it, I am ok too :) | |
| 15:19:07 | edleafe | I would suggest s/acceleration/accelerator | |
| 15:19:15 | shaohe_ | openstack network flavor create | |
| 15:19:52 | zhipeng | edleafe any reason for that ? | |
| 15:20:04 | sundar | IMHO, the term 'accelerator' is more in line with other usages -- but go ahead :) | |
| 15:20:16 | edleafe | ^^ what sundar said | |
| 15:21:06 | zhipeng | ya I'm just thinking when we actually using accelerator it will need to be more specific (FPGA, GPU, ...) | |
| 15:21:24 | zhipeng | acceleration could just represent a service type offered by cyborg in general | |
| 15:21:26 | shaohe_ | sundar: edleafe: $ openstack --help |grep volume | |
| 15:21:35 | xinran__ | Yes I think accelerator is more reasonable | |
| 15:21:52 | sundar | zhipeng: yes, openstack accelerator create fpga <args> -- here 'fpga' is 'object-2' | |
| 15:21:55 | NokMikeR | acceleration implies more than one device? accelerator is singular or one device. If we debate this to the end we end up somewhere in particle physics... :) | |
| 15:22:09 | zhipeng | haha NokMikeR | |
| 15:22:17 | zhipeng | but I think accelerator has more votes here | |
| 15:22:31 | sum12 | i feel accelerator/acceleration are both too complicated as compared to service/image/network/... | |
| 15:22:47 | zhipeng | sum12 lol what is your suggestion | |
| 15:23:26 | sum12 | I am suggesting to ask we we anything easier in out arsenal ? | |
| 15:23:44 | zhipeng | maybe just acc ? | |
| 15:23:54 | shaohe_ | sum12: acc for abbreviation？ | |
| 15:24:07 | zhipeng | shaohe_ man crush | |
| 15:24:07 | sundar | sum12: we use the term 'accelerator' or 'device'. But the term device is too general? | |
| 15:24:25 | zhipeng | sundar ya that might give people confusion | |
| 15:24:25 | sum12 | accel ? | |
| 15:24:38 | zhipeng | accel a little bit too Xilinx-ish ? | |
| 15:24:43 | sundar | sum12: accel is ok by me. I use that abbrev too | |
| 15:24:52 | zhipeng | okey anyone else ? | |