| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-cyborg - 2020-02-25 | |||
| 00:45:26 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/cyborg master: simplify devstack plugin https://review.opendev.org/708773 | |
| 00:45:26 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/cyborg master: add support for installing cyborg client https://review.opendev.org/709629 | |
| 00:45:26 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/cyborg master: WIP add cyborg multinode job https://review.opendev.org/709641 | |
| 14:59:47 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/cyborg master: Fix setting cyborg agent hostname https://review.opendev.org/709749 | |
| 19:52:50 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/cyborg master: WIP add cyborg multinode job https://review.opendev.org/709641 | |
| 20:37:39 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/cyborg master: WIP add cyborg multinode job https://review.opendev.org/709641 | |
| 23:36:34 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/cyborg master: WIP add cyborg multinode job https://review.opendev.org/709641 | |
| #openstack-cyborg - 2020-02-26 | |||
| 08:13:53 | openstackgerrit | Brin Zhang proposed openstack/cyborg master: Delete sanbox directory https://review.opendev.org/709974 | |
| 09:30:56 | openstackgerrit | Brin Zhang proposed openstack/cyborg master: WIP: add api_samples_test_base to functional https://review.opendev.org/709992 | |
| #openstack-cyborg - 2020-02-27 | |||
| 03:00:05 | Sundar | Hello all | |
| 03:00:17 | Sundar | #startmeeting openstack-cyborg | |
| 03:00:18 | chenke | Hello sudnar. | |
| 03:00:19 | openstack | Meeting started Thu Feb 27 03:00:17 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is Sundar. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | |
| 03:00:20 | openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | |
| 03:00:22 | openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'openstack_cyborg' | |
| 03:00:24 | chenke | #info chenke | |
| 03:00:35 | Sundar | #info Sundar | |
| 03:00:38 | Yumeng | #info Yumeng | |
| 03:00:43 | brinzhang | #info brinzhang | |
| 03:00:45 | xinranwang | #info xinranwang | |
| 03:01:32 | Sundar | Do we have any major topics for today? I'd like to provide a status update on Nova integ after other discussion. | |
| 03:02:07 | xinranwang | I have one topic about microversion | |
| 03:02:49 | Sundar | Ok, xinranwang. Anything else to discuss, before we get int that? | |
| 03:02:50 | xinranwang | Now I implemented a decorator api_version to check the microversion. | |
| 03:03:34 | Yumeng | I only have gpu_driver_improve patches need your reivew: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/cyborg+branch:master+topic:gpu-driver-improve. nothing else. | |
| 03:03:35 | xinranwang | please see https://review.opendev.org/#/c/696860/ | |
| 03:04:17 | brinzhang | I want to talk about the functional tests, I found there are so many work should to do, anyone have some sugestion? or any simple project we can reference? | |
| 03:05:14 | Sundar | xinranwang: do you have a question or something to discuss about that patch? | |
| 03:06:27 | xinranwang | Yes | |
| 03:06:34 | xinranwang | Now I implemented a decorator api_version to check the microversion. | |
| 03:06:38 | brinzhang | Sundar, xinranwang, I think mainly is https://review.opendev.org/#/c/696860/3/cyborg/api/controllers/base.py@85 | |
| 03:08:13 | xinranwang | Do you think we should have a schema check in this patch, IMO, I think schema check is based on microversion support, we can do it later. | |
| 03:08:36 | xinranwang | thanks brinzhang to paste the link | |
| 03:09:42 | shaohe_feng | it can be another patch. | |
| 03:09:53 | Sundar | "This decorator MUST appear first (the outermost | |
| 03:10:14 | shaohe_feng | schema check should not only for microversion | |
| 03:10:24 | shaohe_feng | it should for all APIs. | |
| 03:11:52 | brinzhang | I don't think we should rewrite the same API interface every time while we need to add a new microversion, which will cause a lot of code redundancy. | |
| 03:14:04 | xinranwang | brinzhang: Yes, I understand your concern. For now, we have only one microversion, (the v2.1 is my PoC code, will be merge to v2.0), so there is only one API function. | |
| 03:14:32 | brinzhang | xinranwang: Yeah, understand | |
| 03:15:06 | s_shogo | #info s_shogo | |
| 03:15:20 | xinranwang | What I suggest to do, is to support the microverison firstly, and them we can add schema check in another patch. | |
| 03:17:21 | shaohe_feng | I'd like to talk one things, one patch for one issues. except the nits fix. | |
| 03:18:13 | shaohe_feng | https://review.opendev.org/#/c/693784/1/devstack/lib/cyborg@159 | |
| 03:18:26 | shaohe_feng | ^ this is a example | |
| 03:18:32 | Li_Liu | #info Li_Liu | |
| 03:19:22 | Yumeng | agree with xinranwang. we can have a bp of API shema check later or in next release. | |
| 03:19:23 | shaohe_feng | we have already know there are some issues in devstack config | |
| 03:20:12 | shaohe_feng | about half years ago. | |
| 03:20:36 | Sundar | xinranwang: I think we all agree with Brin's concern, and that we all agree there should be a schema check. You just want it in another patch, right? | |
| 03:20:39 | shaohe_feng | but why we can not continue on it? | |
| 03:21:01 | shaohe_feng | we always want to one patch to fix many issues. | |
| 03:21:10 | shaohe_feng | fix one by one | |
| 03:21:19 | shaohe_feng | this will be a fast way. | |
| 03:21:36 | shaohe_feng | and you can see, https://review.opendev.org/#/c/709749/1/devstack/lib/cyborg | |
| 03:21:54 | xinranwang | Sundar: yes, exactly. As Yumeng said, we should have another bp and patch to implement it. | |
| 03:22:20 | shaohe_feng | It is also devstack fix. we have config it right before. | |
| 03:22:37 | Sundar | Ok, I agree, xinranwang, Yumeng | |
| 03:22:41 | shaohe_feng | Mix many issues together. | |
| 03:22:54 | shaohe_feng | really a bad idea. | |
| 03:23:30 | xinranwang | It seems brinzhang was dropped off, I will talk to him later. Thanks guys. | |
| 03:23:40 | Sundar | s_shogo: No sure what you are trying to say. The link you gave is for an old patch set. Are you saying we should enforce one patch for one issue? | |
| 03:24:57 | s_shogo | Sundar: IMHO, the mention intended to shaohe_feng ? | |
| 03:25:27 | shaohe_feng | yes, one by one. | |
| 03:25:28 | Sundar | Yes, sorry | |
| 03:25:48 | s_shogo | Thanks | |
| 03:26:14 | shaohe_feng | micro step and may be more fast. | |
| 03:26:32 | Sundar | shaohe_feng: Just change the title for your patch, and maybe make 'multinode' as the topic. We could have a patch series for multinode, including Sean's patches | |
| 03:27:02 | Sundar | You already have the right topic | |
| 03:27:03 | shaohe_feng | mircroversion can also be fix one issues. | |
| 03:27:37 | shaohe_feng | and more patch fix other issues. | |
| 03:27:43 | shaohe_feng | This is a right way. | |
| 03:28:34 | shaohe_feng | or it will be the same as we fix "multinode" issues in devstack. last half years, and no progress. | |
| 03:28:56 | shaohe_feng | s/last/take | |
| 03:33:30 | shaohe_feng | ping | |
| 03:34:04 | brinzhang_ | xinranwang, Sundar, Agree the microversion schema do in next release, and it better done in this release, later we(xinranwang) can talk how to do it easy. | |
| 03:34:06 | chenke | Agree, a patch does not need to be modified too much. we can make a series of patches to speed up review. | |
| 03:35:28 | Sundar | chenke, shaoe_feng: Sure, organize in a series of patches. A reviewer may want to see a placeholder patch for the next step before agreeing to previous step? | |
| 03:35:38 | Sundar | shaohe_feng: ^ | |
| 03:35:52 | chenke | Ye. Agree | |
| 03:36:37 | chenke | reviewer's suggestions, we should carefully consider and give a reasonable response. | |
| 03:37:17 | Sundar | I think we are all in the same page. shaohe_feng may feel that his patch has not merged in a long time. Let's review it quickly and help it get merged. | |
| 03:37:23 | Sundar | Ok, anything else? | |
| 03:38:23 | shaohe_feng | Add NOTE in patch or summarize the tasks lists in etherpad to follow, if we want to address more issues. | |
| 03:38:42 | shaohe_feng | s/follow/track | |
| 03:39:21 | Sundar | Yumeng: you seem to be adding mdev support to Cyborg. That is interesting | |
| 03:39:52 | Sundar | Tht will require changes to Nova patches too | |
| 03:40:11 | Sundar | I am only allowing 'PCI' in the current patches. | |
| 03:40:13 | Yumeng | yes, I found that controlpatch_id_type of nvidia GPU should be "MDEV" | |
| 03:41:01 | Yumeng | Sundar: I was thinking just now: attach_handle type should also be "MDEV". do you agree? | |
| 03:41:06 | shaohe_feng | now the intel and NVIDIA vGPU are MDEV devices. | |
| 03:41:10 | Sundar | Yumeng: What do you mean that you found that? If you are doing PCI passthrough of the physical function, it would be 'PCI'. The mdeiated device is a different way of attaching a device, different from PCI passthrough. | |
| 03:41:11 | shaohe_feng | Only AMD's are SRIOV. | |
| 03:42:03 | Sundar | shaohe_feng and all: We had already discussed that Cyborg intends to support only physical PF passthrough for GPUs for now. | |
| 03:42:12 | Yumeng | Thanks shaohe_feng for pointing this. | |
| 03:42:50 | shaohe_feng | IMHO, MDEV can exist with nova's together for a long time. like PCI devices | |
| 03:42:53 | Sundar | What prevents a Nvidia GPU's PF from being passed through to a VM, instead of mdev? | |
| 03:43:59 | shaohe_feng | we should not prevents it. | |
| 03:46:04 | Sundar | Yumeng: Re. attach_handle type should also be "MDEV" -- yes, in fact control path ID cannot be 'mdev', only the attach handle can be. Because mdev refers to how the device is attached to a VM. | |
| 03:46:31 | Sundar | The cpid is PCI even for a device that supports mdev. | |