| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-cyborg - 2020-07-09 | |||
| 03:16:19 | Yumeng | ollivier: yes sure, please go ahead. if we can help in the V2 API clarifications | |
| 03:16:19 | ollivier | Yumeng: I am sending you our criteria. Ussuri is too new regarding our criteria | |
| 03:17:49 | ildikov | Yumeng: brinzhang_: when it comes to Telecom environments operators need hihgly stable platforms and available commercial support among other criteria | |
| 03:17:59 | ollivier | When you mention it's incomplete, I'm not sure if v2 could backport it to Train at lest from a theorical point of view. | |
| 03:18:02 | Yumeng | ollivier: alright. got it. | |
| 03:18:25 | ildikov | this usually prevents that community to stay close to master or use the latest release both in production environments and even in CNTT unfortunately | |
| 03:18:39 | ildikov | I hope it will improve in the future | |
| 03:19:23 | ollivier | Does it depend on specific service Ussuri versions (e.g. nova)? | |
| 03:19:41 | brinzhang_ | ildikov: I think you can backport the v2 api to Train, but there are many patches you should backport to Train | |
| 03:20:24 | ildikov | brinzhang_: do you mean backporting downstream? | |
| 03:21:50 | brinzhang_ | I can be sure that the API for backport v2 downstream should work, but the function of interacting with nova may not be backport, it depends on nova version and other related packages | |
| 03:22:47 | brinzhang_ | If you want to use nova-cyborg-interaction feature, I suggest you upgrade your platform | |
| 03:22:48 | Yumeng | from cyborg's perspective, just backport V2 API to Train is theorically possible, but the nova-cyborg integration is not that easy if backport to train(which needs nova's help and may affect much). | |
| 03:22:58 | ollivier | Here I would consider first the backport in Cyborg stable/ussuri | |
| 03:23:32 | ollivier | Would it also ask for backports in Nova as well? | |
| 03:24:00 | shaohe_feng | hi all | |
| 03:24:00 | ildikov | as CNTT is consuming upstream code but not maintaining patches locally at this point I'm not sure downstream backport is an option | |
| 03:24:02 | shaohe_feng | sorry | |
| 03:24:18 | brinzhang_ | Unless you don’t want to use the nova-cybrog-interaction feature | |
| 03:24:25 | shaohe_feng | conflict with other meeting. | |
| 03:24:40 | Yumeng | brinzhang_:yes, +1 | |
| 03:25:09 | Yumeng | hi shaohe_feng: no pb. | |
| 03:25:33 | ildikov | brinzhang_: what's included in the nova-cybrog-interaction feature? | |
| 03:25:45 | ildikov | brinzhang_: I assume some API endpoints depend on it? | |
| 03:26:23 | Yumeng | ildikov: nova operations like creating a VM with accelerator(provisioned by cyborg) , this kind of function depends on nova/ussuri version | |
| 03:27:19 | brinzhang_ | ollivier: Whether it is nova or cyborg, I think it can be used from Ussuri backport to stable/Train, but it will definitely encounter problems, I think it needs to be seriously considered. | |
| 03:28:31 | ollivier | brinzhang_: It's just checking what's doable. It would ask for backports in both Cyborg and Nova which seem quite serious. | |
| 03:28:33 | brinzhang_ | ildikov: agree with Yumeng, if you dont want to use nova-cyborg-interaction, I think you dont worry about to backport the cyborg V2 api to stable/train | |
| 03:28:43 | Yumeng | nova-cybrog-interaction feature will affect creation, deletion, soft reboot, hard reboot, VM wih accelerators this kind of operations https://docs.openstack.org/api-guide/compute/accelerator-support.html | |
| 03:29:12 | ildikov | Yumeng: thanks for the clarification, I believe that feature would be very much in our interest | |
| 03:29:17 | Yumeng | pls check supported operations in the link above. | |
| 03:29:56 | ildikov | ollivier: I assume you mean backproting upstream, right? | |
| 03:30:20 | brinzhang_ | ollivier: yes, the nova-cyborg-interaction feature is big, you can see https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:merged+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/nova-cyborg-interaction | |
| 03:30:26 | s_shogo | sorry for late | |
| 03:30:40 | shaohe_feng | ildikov what's your openstack version? | |
| 03:31:11 | ollivier | ildikov: yes as you mentioned, here it's only about the OpenStack projects. All operators are free to backport by themselves but it would be out of CNTT. | |
| 03:31:26 | Yumeng | ildikov: does CNTT wanna support full function now or like half a year later? | |
| 03:31:35 | ollivier | shaohe_feng: Train for our next release (September) | |
| 03:32:06 | Yumeng | ok. got it. | |
| 03:32:23 | ildikov | Yumeng: the aim is full support, but the question is if it is doable or not | |
| 03:32:25 | shaohe_feng | seems it is mor easy for Train | |
| 03:33:00 | ildikov | Yumeng: if upstream backport is not an option then our interest would be to fix up the documentation for Cyborg to be clear about what is available in Train | |
| 03:33:06 | shaohe_feng | seems it is easier for Train | |
| 03:33:33 | Yumeng | ildikov: yes, that would be easier as a start! I can help. | |
| 03:33:41 | xinranwang__ | Hi all. | |
| 03:33:42 | ollivier | Yumeng: yes we will keep rolling. As far as I understand, waiting CNTT to select U or newer seems the best option | |
| 03:34:13 | Yumeng | ollivier: agree! | |
| 03:34:27 | Yumeng | hi xinranwang__ | |
| 03:34:28 | xinranwang__ | Sorry for late. | |
| 03:34:50 | xinranwang__ | Just finish another meeting | |
| 03:35:39 | brinzhang_ | xinranwang_, shaohe_feng, s_shogo: Just right~ | |
| 03:35:55 | ollivier | 1 to fix https://releases.openstack.org/train/highlights.html#cyborg | |
| 03:36:31 | ollivier | "Updated Cyborg APIs to version 2" should be removed as we just discussed, right? | |
| 03:36:31 | Yumeng | xinranwang__,s_shogo: no worries. | |
| 03:37:25 | brinzhang_ | ollivier: yeah, thanks, you can update that, it's not very accurate | |
| 03:37:31 | ollivier | I would think that "https://docs.openstack.org/cyborg/train/api/api.html#v2-0" is possible wrong too. "see The Train release introduces version 2.0 APIs. Details of these APIs can be found here." | |
| 03:37:48 | Yumeng | we did update part of APIs to version2, do you wanna a detailed list saying what are removed to V2, what are not yet | |
| 03:37:50 | ildikov | ollivier: +1 on U or newer for CNTT | |
| 03:38:26 | ildikov | Yumeng: the Train docs refers to the spec I think when it comes to the API and it is misleading in terms of what is available in Train | |
| 03:38:36 | ollivier | Yumeng: yes please. I'm always lost when we say that an API version is divided into 2 releases | |
| 03:39:12 | brinzhang_ | ollivier: thanks point this. | |
| 03:39:21 | ildikov | Yumeng: it would be better I think to be explicit and have the proper API documentation for Train with the available functions | |
| 03:39:24 | brinzhang_ | Yumeng: We need to clarify which APIs in Train support V2 and which are completed in Ussuri. | |
| 03:39:25 | ildikov | ollivier: +1 | |
| 03:40:20 | ollivier | How can we somehow deprecate v1 if v2 is partial? | |
| 03:41:27 | brinzhang_ | As I know, deprecate the v1 API until we completed the v2 API in Ussuri | |
| 03:41:59 | brinzhang_ | In v1, some attribute cannot support to request | |
| 03:43:13 | xinranwang__ | v1 api does not match current data model. We have changed data model pretty much, that 's why we need a new set of api(v2) as well | |
| 03:43:14 | Yumeng | ildikov: here it is the list. Train supports limited V2 APIs : Device Profiles API and Accelerator Requests APIs. and Ussuri supports full V2 APIs: Device Profiles API and Accelerator Requests APIs and Devices APIs, Deployables APIs, | |
| 03:43:33 | xinranwang__ | I agree that we should clarify this in document | |
| 03:43:56 | Yumeng | I will update documentation today to clarify. | |
| 03:44:16 | ildikov | thanks Yumeng | |
| 03:44:21 | songwenping_ | ollivier you can find corresponding api in v2 for deprecate v1. | |
| 03:44:32 | brinzhang_ | Yumeng: thanks | |
| 03:44:37 | ollivier | ok v2 is well a superset of v1 (from operations point of view). | |
| 03:44:55 | ildikov | I think it will be a big improvement to have the documentation uodated | |
| 03:45:31 | ollivier | Just a last question: Device Profiles v2 API and Accelerator Requests v2 APIs were released in Train, right? | |
| 03:45:40 | brinzhang_ | ildikov: thanks, Improve the readability and accuracy of the document, this is what we have been doing. | |
| 03:45:58 | Yumeng | ollivier: yes. they are released in Train. | |
| 03:46:32 | ollivier | and the microversion support? | |
| 03:46:37 | ollivier | Train as well? | |
| 03:47:07 | ollivier | It should be | |
| 03:47:31 | Yumeng | ollivier: nope. microversion is released in Ussuri | |
| 03:47:41 | xinranwang__ | microversion is in U | |
| 03:49:55 | ollivier | ok it's very clear. Then your release notes are quite ok if we consider the time you wrote them (before ussuri). Mentioning the API capability (Device Profiles API and Accelerator Requests APIs) could enhance it a litlle bit. | |
| 03:51:25 | ollivier | About Functest, I could integrate your tempest plugin in Functest Kali (U-release) or Functest master (next Victoria) but I'm not clear how I can gate it (specific hardware?) | |
| 03:52:16 | ollivier | I will check the devstack configuration. It would allow integrating the testing part in advance until CNTT selects U or newer. | |
| 03:53:03 | Yumeng | ollivier: not necessary to use specific hardware, current tempest-plugin is using a fake driver(you can understand it as a fake device) to test the cyborg workflow | |
| 03:54:11 | ildikov | ollivier: I think testing on specific hardware would require third-party CIs, I don't think our infra has those type of resources available | |
| 03:54:35 | Yumeng | cyborg-tempest-plugin(U-release) should work fine. since it is complete to do test for the basic cyborg workflow and cyborg-nova integration workflow | |
| 03:54:45 | Yumeng | ildikov: yes, exactly | |
| 03:55:00 | ollivier | Yumeng: great. That shouldn't be a challenge in that case. I will have a look to your testing plugin before my holidays (in a couple of days) | |
| 03:55:38 | Yumeng | ok. cool | |
| 03:55:48 | ildikov | Looks like we have a plan :) | |
| 03:56:15 | ollivier | ildikov: at least we could in OPNFV (I think OpenStack as well). Here it's more about verifying the test integration in Functest SUT. If we can select fake drivers, it should work easily. | |
| 03:57:08 | ildikov | ollivier: yeah, it would be great to make it work in Functest so when CNTT gets to U and newer we already have that figured out | |
| 03:57:18 | ollivier | Yes very clear on my side. Thank you. I will give you my feedback about the testing part. | |
| 03:57:42 | Yumeng | great! ping me at this channel if you have more questions.^^ | |
| 03:57:51 | ollivier | Yumeng: sure | |
| 03:57:54 | ildikov | thanks Yumeng and team! | |