On 09/16/2018 09:28 PM, Naichuan Sun wrote:
Hi, Sylvain,
In truth I’m worrying about the old root rp which include the vgpu
inventory. There is no field in the inventory which can display which
GPU/GPUG it belong to, right? Anyway, will discuss it after you come back.
As Sylvain mentions below, you will need to have some mechanism in the
XenAPI virt driver which creates child resource providers under the
existing root provider (which is the compute node resource provider).
You will need to have the virt driver persist the mapping between your
internal physical GPU group name and the UUID of the resource provider
record that the virt driver creates for that PGPU group.
So, for example, let's say you have two PGPU groups on the host. They
are named PGPU_A and PGPU_B. The XenAPI virt driver will need to ask the
ProviderTree object it receives in the update_provider_tree() virt
driver method whether there is a resource provider named "PGPU_A" in the
tree. If not, the virt driver needs to create a new child resource
provider with the name "PGPU_A" with a parent provider pointing to the
root compute node provider. The ProviderTree.new_child() method is used
to create new child providers:
https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/82270cc261f6c1d9d2cc386f1fb445dd66023f75/nova/compute/provider_tree.py#L411
Hope that makes sense,
-jay
Thank very much.
BR.
Naichuan Sun
*From:*Sylvain Bauza [mailto:sba...@redhat.com]
*Sent:* Friday, September 14, 2018 9:34 PM
*To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
*Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] About microversion setting to enable
nested resource provider
Le jeu. 13 sept. 2018 à 19:29, Naichuan Sun <naichuan....@citrix.com
<mailto:naichuan....@citrix.com>> a écrit :
Hi, Sylvain,
Thank you very much for the information. It is pity that I can’t
attend the meeting.
I have a concern about reshaper in multi-type vgpu support.
In the old vgpu support, we only have one vgpu inventory in root
resource provider, which means we only support one vgpu type. When
do reshape, placement will send allocations(which include just one
vgpu resource allocation information) to the driver, if the host
have more than one pgpu/pgpug(which support different vgpu type),
how do we know which pgpu/pgpug own the allocation information? Do
we need to communicate with hypervisor the confirm that?
The reshape will actually move the existing allocations for a VGPU
resource class to the inventory for this class that is on the child
resource provider now with the reshape.
Since we agreed on keeping consistent naming, there is no need to guess
which is which. That said, you raise a point that was discussed during
the PTG and we all agreed there was an upgrade impact as multiple vGPUs
shouldn't be allowed until the reshape is done.
Accordingly, see my spec I reproposed for Stein which describes the
upgrade impact https://review.openstack.org/#/c/602474/
Since I'm at the PTG, we have huge time difference between you and me,
but we can discuss on that point next week when I'm back (my mornings
match then your afternoons)
-Sylvain
Thank you very much.
BR.
Naichuan Sun
*From:*Sylvain Bauza [mailto:sba...@redhat.com
<mailto:sba...@redhat.com>]
*Sent:* Thursday, September 13, 2018 11:47 PM
*To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
*Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] About microversion setting to enable
nested resource provider
Hey Naichuan,
FWIW, we discussed on the missing pieces for nested resource
providers. See the (currently-in-use) etherpad
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-ptg-stein and lookup for
"closing the gap on nested resource providers" (L144 while I speak)
The fact that we are not able to schedule yet is a critical piece
that we said we're going to work on it as soon as we can.
-Sylvain
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Eric Fried <openst...@fried.cc
<mailto:openst...@fried.cc>> wrote:
There's a patch series in progress for this:
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:use-nested-allocation-candidates
It needs some TLC. I'm sure gibi and tetsuro would welcome some
help...
efried
On 09/13/2018 08:31 AM, Naichuan Sun wrote:
> Thank you very much, Jay.
> Is there somewhere I could set microversion(some configure
file?), Or just modify the source code to set it?
>
> BR.
> Naichuan Sun
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com
<mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com>]
> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2018 9:19 PM
> To: Naichuan Sun <naichuan....@citrix.com
<mailto:naichuan....@citrix.com>>; OpenStack Development Mailing
List (not for usage questions)
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
> Cc: melanie witt <melwi...@gmail.com
<mailto:melwi...@gmail.com>>; efr...@us.ibm.com
<mailto:efr...@us.ibm.com>; Sylvain Bauza <sba...@redhat.com
<mailto:sba...@redhat.com>>
> Subject: Re: About microversion setting to enable nested
resource provider
>
> On 09/13/2018 06:39 AM, Naichuan Sun wrote:
>> Hi, guys,
>>
>> Looks n-rp is disabled by default because microversion
matches 1.29 :
>>
https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/place
>> ment/handlers/allocation_candidate.py#L252
>>
>> Anyone know how to set the microversion to enable n-rp in
placement?
>
> It is the client which must send the 1.29+ placement API
microversion header to indicate to the placement API server that
the client wants to receive nested provider information in the
allocation candidates response.
>
> Currently, nova-scheduler calls the scheduler reportclient's
> get_allocation_candidates() method:
>
>
https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/0ba34a818414823eda5e693dc2127a534410b5df/nova/scheduler/manager.py#L138
>
> The scheduler reportclient's get_allocation_candidates()
method currently passes the 1.25 placement API microversion header:
>
>
https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/0ba34a818414823eda5e693dc2127a534410b5df/nova/scheduler/client/report.py#L353
>
>
https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/0ba34a818414823eda5e693dc2127a534410b5df/nova/scheduler/client/report.py#L53
>
> In order to get the nested information returned in the
allocation candidates response, that would need to be upped to 1.29.
>
> Best,
> -jay
>
__________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
<http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
<http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
<http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
