12:00:54 #startmeeting PCI Passthrough 12:00:55 Meeting started Tue Mar 18 12:00:54 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is baoli. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 12:00:56 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 12:00:58 The meeting name has been set to 'pci_passthrough' 12:01:17 Hi 12:10:47 hi 12:10:59 Hi irenab 12:11:26 I didn't realize that the meeting is one hour earlier, sorry 12:11:38 no problem 12:11:48 It seems that no one else is present at the moment 12:12:07 are you sure it shouls be now and not in one hour? 12:12:22 It's utc 1300, right? 12:12:36 sorry, I'm wrong 12:12:49 it's 9:00am our time. 12:12:56 I see 12:12 12:13:09 its 14:13 afor me 12:13:37 I don't know why I am confused today 12:13:42 so, meeting in 45 minutes? 12:13:47 Yea 13:01:13 Hi 13:01:15 o/ 13:01:22 hello 13:01:22 hi 13:02:09 hi 13:02:15 I think that we are going to talk about the sr-iov session we are going to have at the summit 13:02:35 I registered a session on neutron 13:02:45 I would like also to discuss a bit documentation 13:02:47 does anyone know how to register a joint session instead? 13:03:06 irenab, sure 13:03:31 now or later? 13:03:39 IIRC there wasn't an actual mechanism for registering a joint session in HK. I just talked to the "other" PTL. 13:04:02 but I heard something about a "joint" day so maybe that's changed 13:04:44 beagles: any idea which day? I have flight back at Friday noon 13:04:56 there is cross-project workshop category 13:05:56 baoli, nice 13:06:04 irenab, no 13:06:20 irenab, I'll see if I can find out during this meeting 13:06:52 beagles: thanks 13:07:19 So I think that I can move the session under that categary, then 13:08:21 I wonder if pinging the respective PTLs as well is frowned upon.. a casual mention at the very least :) 13:08:35 baoli: I think it can be good idea to prepare and publish the contennt, links to existing patches, etc, in advance 13:08:41 baoli, i'm change my patch to match the interface you used in your patches as possible , hope it help 13:08:42 any plan? 13:08:44 baoli, you can create design topic with cross project type, is it what you look for? 13:09:25 heyongli, folks and PTL suggests joint session 13:09:52 irenab, the meeting wiki has everything in there, but it's probably convoluted 13:09:57 I also wonder if we need another session to discuss nova api for vnic_type request or it will be covered on same cross project session 13:11:01 irenab, are you talking about vnic-type in the 'nova boot' command? 13:11:14 baoli: yes 13:11:47 it was requested by John that it should be done in some abstract way, some sort of NIC flavors maybe 13:12:03 right 13:12:06 irenab, first day - Tuesday - unconfirmed, but Friday is such a bad idea, I can't imagine.... 13:12:45 beagles: so no need to change flight ickets? 13:13:16 https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Passthrough#Recap_of_Discussions. The link recaps what we have discussed so far. Do you guys want to put it in a separate page 13:14:11 We can discuss how we want to cover each of them 13:14:42 heyongli, I'll take a look at your patch update 13:15:32 not release, boli, i'm changing it, some commts need addressed 13:15:53 heyongli, ok 13:16:14 sorry my network quite unstable now... 13:17:04 I think we need some clear list of use cases that we handle and design/constructs options we suggest (preferably with code samples) 13:17:04 irenab, let me know what's missing in the recap link 13:17:54 irenab, agreed. We have use cases in the meeting wiki as well. Can you guys present some use cases that we haven't thought about? 13:18:40 baoli: just one suggestion 13:18:42 We probably need to focus on two types of use cases: driven by admin and driven by tenant users 13:19:04 maybe there is no need to bring up the original google doc where there are several authors 13:19:16 +1 irenab 13:19:42 +1 13:19:46 irenab, agreed 13:20:20 too many details discuss process really block guy want to dive in 13:20:36 sadasu, can you clarify your thoughts 13:21:04 I'll try to sum up use cases following the wiki/google docs we had and send update; so next week meeting we can go over 13:21:30 irenab, cool 13:22:06 thanks, irenab 13:22:19 what you have in https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Passthrough#Agenda_on_Jan._8th.2C_2014 is a better summarization than the google doc 13:22:49 google doc might be confusing for anyone who is trying to come onboard to this... 13:22:55 sadasu: I think we need start from clean 13:23:27 yes... I started on this but kept getting distracted (pulled off) to do other stuff 13:23:29 we may keep references o existing docs but not require any new people to go over all the existing papers 13:23:55 but a focused clean slate would be good... 13:24:28 ok, let's start with a new doc. 13:24:50 If I understand correctly the idea of design summit it to present what use cases we want to handle and how we want to handle it 13:25:00 ok…and are we starting this off with Irenab's use cases based on admin and tenant views? 13:25:19 irenab, +1 13:26:07 irenab, I would agree 13:26:07 sadasu: I think its one chapter, the other is neutron apis that we already ahve, nova - neutron interaction, nova- scheduler enhancment for SR-IOV devices,... 13:26:50 * beagles thinks of anything he might have that irenab doesn't already just have in her head... 13:26:53 probably not 13:27:36 beagles: :-) 13:28:38 ireanb: sounds good :-) just want to make sure we are covering everything 13:29:05 baoli: can you please provide documentation recap on nova parts that you managed via your patch? I think neutron generic parts are already merged, so need just to describe what neutron expose via api 13:29:05 is this all going to be one session? 13:30:27 Irenab, sure. I already had a wiki 13:30:36 sadasu: good question 13:30:58 I can update if anything is missing. The wiki can be accessed following the links in the recap 13:31:47 baoli: great, thanks. Are there any open issues there? 13:33:59 irenab, have you tried the patch yet? 13:34:08 in recap chaper , there both group and flavor , i think the flavor is our goal, right? 13:34:49 I think that we need to decide if there is one or more sessions and if we need nova session in addition to cross-project session, for nova apis 13:34:58 baoli: still waiting for setup.... 13:35:16 irenab, ok 13:35:32 irenab, if both get approved, that's will be great, 13:36:09 heyongli: the session that you registered supposed to cover nova apis, right? 13:36:23 yeah, common part 13:36:39 heyongli, now that we can't make it to Icehouse, my understanding is that it's still open for discussion. 13:36:46 if necessary, even the interaction part can be elimated from this 13:37:18 baoli, maybe, i recap we agree with flavor, supprize me 13:38:19 so for now there are two sessions, one cross project and one nova, right? 13:39:09 irenab, if i could choose as like this 13:40:48 baoli: heyongli: I am quite lost with all nova group/flavor desicions. Can you please give it some write-up for what is the prefered direction towards Juno? 13:41:41 yunhong and me totally prefer flavor as john might prefer, 13:42:25 irenab, I am not sure about the direction 13:43:24 Once you have a clear list of use cases in terms of admin/user, it would be used as a guideline for the user interfaces/APIs. 13:43:32 s/would/could 13:45:14 I'll start with use cases with 'what' part. Then we can proceed with 'how' 13:45:43 +1 13:46:03 irenab, thank i will check if my bp's case covered 13:47:46 I just think we need to have prefered way defined before the summit to get people approve/disagree with and not open it for discussion for all alternatives. Otherwise, we will find ourself discussiing it for several months as we did for Icehouse... 13:48:25 irenab, +2, totally agree 13:49:09 heyongli: we all agree today, its probably the spring spirit 13:49:43 I have small question regarding documentation 13:50:05 sure 13:50:47 I was assigned with documentation bug for vnic_type in neutron port and not sure that it should be covered 13:51:28 I assume it should be in networking part, covering for port binding details 13:52:20 rkukura: are you here? 13:52:27 yes 13:52:46 are you going to document binding:profile and vif_details? 13:53:31 irenab: Good question - still focusing on bug fixes, haven't thought about docs for icehouse yet 13:54:09 The API doc should definitely be updated for vif_details, even though its admin-only. 13:54:20 rkukura: I was kindly asked to handle vnic_type documentation. 13:54:33 I am not sure if we are going to add some general SR-IOV chapter, what do you think? 13:54:37 It should already cover binding:profile. 13:55:21 I think the API doc section on the portbindings extension should be updated. 13:55:46 I thought to add vnic_type there, thanks 13:56:11 so for now now additional SR-IOV info is not going to be documented, right? 13:56:19 It does seem a user and admin docs for SR-IOV is needed too. 13:56:22 ^no 13:57:01 I'm not really clear on whether enough is usable in icehouse to try to cover it in the docs. 13:58:17 Time is up, let me record an action item 13:58:21 #action identify a clear list of use cases in terms of admin/user. And Irenab will start with a doc for the use cases. Let's work on that in this week. Go over it next week. 13:58:48 Irenab, can you send emails about the use cases so that people can add any that could be missing? 13:58:49 rkukura: agree 13:59:01 baoli: sure 13:59:14 I think I can send initial list on Thu 13:59:25 irenab, that would be great. 13:59:33 Thanks everyone 13:59:58 thanks 14:00:01 #endmeeting