13:01:49 #startmeeting PCI passthrough 13:01:49 Meeting started Tue Dec 16 13:01:49 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is baoli. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 13:01:50 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 13:01:50 Hello 13:01:53 The meeting name has been set to 'pci_passthrough' 13:01:53 Hi 13:02:03 Hey 13:02:05 o/ 13:02:15 hi 13:02:28 Shall we focus on the bps/specs today? 13:02:41 ok 13:02:47 yeah 13:02:51 hi 13:03:05 shaohe_feng: looking at your spec now 13:03:34 baoli: thank you. 13:03:53 shaohe_feng: your use case description is pretty interesting. 13:04:24 baoli: jaypipes help me to improve it. :) 13:04:42 I would like to introduce moshele, who is going to work on SRIOV related issues as well 13:05:04 hi, everyone 13:05:05 moshele: Hi, welcome. full name? 13:05:13 Moshe Levi 13:05:24 hi, moshele 13:05:42 moshele: hi. welcome. I'm also a fresher. :) 13:06:08 shaohe_feng: :) 13:06:26 moshele: welcome :-) 13:06:37 welcome moshele 13:06:45 Looks like that we need +2s for our specs. 13:07:31 Hi baoli: can you have a look at https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/sriov-sched-with-stateless-offloads 13:07:34 baoli, this is..., how we get foucs, 13:08:15 jchapman, ok, looking 13:08:55 There is one more topic we must address: neutron split that happens during Kilo 13:09:01 jchapman, I saw you added more stuff in the testing section. 13:09:25 baoli: He just a little detail on testing, Sean wanted it 13:09:49 I also opened a RFE on libvirt 13:10:37 jchapman_: looks good to me. will +1. What's the RFE on libvirt about? 13:12:45 jchapman_: what's the libvirt RFE? 13:12:46 baoli: sorry i got kicked out. The RFE is from a comment from sahid 13:13:17 baoli: Its not a bug its more a feature request, but we are working on the patch fro this now 13:14:31 jchapman: I see. 13:15:25 jchapman_: one more question. Given that the sriov properties are specified with the image, so .0 means the first sriov port as specified in the order of --nic arguments? 13:15:47 baoli: exactly 13:17:07 jchapman, thinking about the way it's specified, would it open a door to declare a sriov port in the image, something like: port.0=sriov, caps, etc? 13:17:39 irenab, can we discuss that in a bit? 13:17:51 baoli: ok 13:17:58 baoli, irendb, sure, lets chat later 13:19:08 irenab, boli, and all, how could get focus, bp deadline is soon.. 13:19:30 For neutron the deadline was yesterday 13:20:26 irenab, en, i know, do you have bp approved? 13:20:34 I am not sure what is the status of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138753/, it did not get either +2 nor -2 yet 13:21:12 the SR-IOV traffic rate was rejected to L release 13:21:31 jchapman: sorry, I was referring to Irenab's earlier request for neutron split discussion after asking you that question about sriov port. 13:21:53 baoli: ok no prob 13:22:15 so about the split... 13:22:58 neutron drivers team approved the split between neutron as integration platform and neutron backends 13:23:03 irenab: seems like that there will be exceptions. So we may want to reach for the cores. 13:23:08 including ML2 mechanism drivers 13:23:47 small repos means more core to review the feature, this might be good thing. 13:23:48 which means that neutron MD/plugin code should be hosted out of the neutron tree (stackforge) 13:24:35 irenab: the ML has some activity on how diff drivers are trying to do their split 13:24:53 We still need to see if Ml2 as sub-community wants to host all MDs together, but according to started efforts for ODL and Arista drivers seems that everyone goes by itself 13:25:34 I think that here we can decide what makes sense for us and suggest it 13:25:35 for ML2 drivers I think there is some discussion on what remains in tree and what goes out 13:26:10 irenab: as I understand, yes, every driver is going with a seperate repo 13:27:01 So seems that we should take the SRIOV MD out and maintain it at stackforge 13:27:21 irenab: the common one? 13:28:01 baoli: I think we should decide what is the most reasonable way to do it 13:28:02 baoli: no choice in that matter..yes common one goes out too 13:28:38 irenab: are you suggesting that the common sr-iov mech driver should stay in tree? 13:28:50 for example there is a proposal for OVS-DPDK MD, it is also not vendor specific but technology specific 13:29:31 irenab, does that remain in tree? 13:29:36 but making it repository at stackforge has its implications, i.e. who is responsible to vote +2 and apporve code that lands there 13:29:46 baoli: not 13:30:02 irenab, that is what I'm thinking. 13:30:33 the split process is described here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141171/ 13:30:34 irenab: I know it will not be the neutron cores :-) 13:31:21 sadasu: its up to maintainer to set this 13:31:41 irenab: I have read this spec several times 13:32:10 it appears that each (stackforge) repo can decide who it wants to give +2 rights to 13:32:33 ireanb: yes...agreed 13:33:23 So with regards to SR-IOV MD, I guess this team is actually the right people to become maintainers for this MD, but maybe we need to consider wider scope 13:34:09 irenab, by wider scope, you mean? 13:34:44 baoli: generic MDs (not vendor specific) repo 13:35:12 I would suggest to discuss it also tomorrow at ML2 meeting and then decide which way to make the split 13:35:51 we should discuss this at the ml2 meeting 13:36:28 it might be possible to still be able to inherit from this generic MD even if it is in a seperate repo 13:36:33 There are already examples on how to make the split started by some vendor, so technically it should not be too complicated 13:37:28 irenab, so what's your proposal? 13:37:49 sadasu: Maybe it makes sense to keep some MDs together and try to reuse code or maybe refactor the code to have some basic code in tree 13:38:45 baoli: Actually, I am a bit confused right now. One thing for sure, we cannot keep the code in tree 13:38:59 keeping it in tree might be hard to convince...you can try 13:39:12 we can still get organized out of tree 13:39:33 irenab, ok. I'm kind of struggling as well. The MD is not a big chunk of code. And it needs to be maintained separately. 13:39:33 so we can start the split, give all relevant people voting rights and see what should be done next 13:40:52 does that mean: generic MD goes to a repo, and vendor MDs goes to separate repos. 13:40:57 baoli: agree, just for exmple if sadsu wanted to reuse it, it maybe more complicated now 13:41:30 baoli: this is waht I would like to discuss with ML2 team 13:41:55 irenab, so let's bring it up in that meeting. 13:42:16 so lets see waht will be ML2 subteam suggestion and then decide what to do 13:42:53 how is this going to be hooked up with devstack? If I want to use a MD, the devstack has to download from various repos. 13:43:22 baoli: yes. I think moshele already checked how this can be done 13:43:42 irenab, that sounds good. 13:43:46 baoli: yes corresponding devstack changes have to be made too 13:44:24 Shall we move to the next topics? 13:44:46 but the thing is that devstack becomes vendor specific, right? 13:45:20 baoli: I do not think so, you canjust point what repos to download 13:45:52 irenab, how about vendor specific config? 13:46:15 currently that stays in tree 13:46:22 and the verndor specific db changes 13:46:34 baoli: and extensions also 13:47:06 irenab, sadasu: ok 13:47:07 baoli: it is going to be a challange ... 13:48:44 alright, any other topics? otherwise, can we go back to the question that I asked earlier on the image associated sriov properties? 13:49:52 no other topic for me 13:50:15 neutron going to be scatter, will this mean sriov featrue we are doing is high possible to delay? 13:51:14 yonglihe: can you please clarify your question? 13:51:48 irenab, i.e, your bp, been impact most likely 13:51:56 until split is done? 13:52:51 seems that neutron priories for Kilo mostly around refactor and split everything 13:53:39 irenab, yeah i concern this, this mean we might can not get focus, casue big change happenning 13:54:19 yongilhe: this is neutron specific, so Nova should be unaffected 13:54:37 yonglihe: yes, but maybe further we can move much faster if no infra change will be required 13:55:03 irenab, i also think this is a good thing somehow, 13:55:13 i hope nova get split also 13:55:42 it's much bigger than neutron, schduler is on going. 13:56:22 yonglihe: for nova seems the direction is exactly the opposite. For vif_drivers was strong objection to allow out of tree support 13:57:39 baoli, irenab, i also had a rough idea, the sriov tag, physical network might don't needed, if neutron had interface mapping, can use to inject property to pci devices. 13:57:45 younglihe: you should be aware of split for CI to keep running 13:58:09 irenab, thanks remind this. 13:58:27 yongilhe, can you be specific on interface mapping? 13:59:18 baoli, we had configration for vlan: mapping: phynet1:eth1 something like this 13:59:46 then, we can inject or query neutro to get the pci device informations to nova, 13:59:48 yonglihe: this is for neutron agent 14:00:12 yonglihe: lets discuss it next meeting 14:00:22 irenab, yeah, anyway, we had redundent information about this 14:00:38 yonglihe: agree 14:00:58 this might could be elimated somehow, let's going on next time. 14:01:09 yongilhe: we had discussion on this earlier, I remember. So let's keep looking at it. 14:01:20 thanks everyone 14:01:25 thanks, 14:01:27 thanks 14:01:41 thanks 14:01:42 thanks 14:01:46 #endmeeting