13:01:53 <baoli> #startmeeting PCI Passthrough 13:01:54 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Feb 19 13:01:53 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is baoli. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 13:01:55 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 13:01:57 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'pci_passthrough' 13:02:20 <heyongli> hi 13:03:26 <baoli> I don't have a specific agenda 13:03:44 <irenab> let's do update each on on his parts 13:03:51 <heyongli> i release a patch set contain basic support , you can check it 13:04:19 <heyongli> lack of unit test, working on that 13:04:44 <irenab> heyongli: is all needed for pci white list definition with tags already under review? 13:04:58 <baoli> https://review.openstack.org/57860 https://review.openstack.org/63267? 13:04:58 <heyongli> irenab, yes 13:05:12 <heyongli> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/pci-extra-info,n,z 13:05:16 <heyongli> this topic 13:05:39 <baoli> heyongli, I will take a look at it. 13:06:12 <irenab> me too 13:06:23 <heyongli> i hope you can review bp, concentrate to the use case, it's not good now. 13:07:03 <heyongli> baoli, the request mark is also release, maybe a proposal patch, the last one 13:07:42 <baoli> heyongli, I will look at it the first thing after the meeting 13:08:54 <irenab> my turn? 13:09:20 <heyongli> sure 13:09:25 <baoli> heyongli, I am also working on a patch to support the three neutron sriov requirements. Just so let you know. 13:10:02 <irenab> vnic_type is reworked according to the rkukura and baoli comments, will upload it after the meeting 13:10:06 <heyongli> you can invite me to review that, then i can not miss it 13:10:26 <irenab> rkukura: sorry for messing your patch yesterday... 13:10:50 <sadasu> Hi 13:10:59 <baoli> irenab, I'm hoping to use your patch soon 13:11:01 <rkukura> irenab: No problem 13:11:21 <irenab> also uploaded WIP for ml2 MD to consume all baoli's work 13:11:52 <irenab> just to make it till 18 Feb 13:12:04 <baoli> irenab, that's good news. Once I can get the basics to work, I will publish my patch. Hopefully soon 13:12:22 <sadasu> irenab: link for that BP/review? 13:12:27 <irenab> baoli: have question on you comment regarding the models.py defined lenght 13:13:00 <irenab> vnic_type is currently defined to be 64 chars 13:13:19 <baoli> irenab, it's a nit. just wondering why it needs 64 chars 13:13:40 <irenab> no special reason, just looked at vif_type 13:13:47 <rkukura> I suspect irenab was following precedent 13:14:22 <baoli> yesterday, I surprisingly found that mysql used up all my disks. I ended up reinstalling it on my server. 13:14:40 <rkukura> probably makes sense to leave some extra room for longer names than are currently needed 13:14:57 <irenab> baoli: I think yesterday was challenging day for many of us... 13:15:20 <irenab> rkukura: have question on DocImpact 13:15:22 <baoli> I think 64 is fine. 13:15:27 <rkukura> sure 13:15:35 <baoli> but 32 would do. 13:15:44 <baoli> Given that this is something internally defined 13:16:05 <irenab> rkukura: I saw it on your patch. Shall I add it for vnic_type 13:16:10 <rkukura> irenab: What's the question? 13:16:15 <rkukura> oh 13:16:44 <rkukura> Yes, a similar comment would make sense 13:16:44 <irenab> is there any instruction what to put there? 13:16:54 <rkukura> maybe it does effect user docs, though 13:17:22 <irenab> I think it may, since this attribute is accesable for user 13:17:27 <rkukura> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/DocImpact 13:17:42 <irenab> Does it mean I need to update the documentation? 13:18:17 <rkukura> Presumably, there will be a documentation effort covering the SR-IOV effort and this would be part of it, right? 13:18:20 <irenab> rkukura: thanks 13:19:21 <irenab> I think it should be 13:19:29 <rkukura> Just say something like "DocImpact: Update portbindings API docs and include in SR-IOV user docs" 13:19:32 <baoli> sadasu, you can find the link from our meeting wiki 13:19:46 <sadasu> baoli: ok...thanks 13:21:07 <beagles> kind of on that note... 13:21:09 <beagles> Is there an "end-to-end" description of the workflows and how they are implemented around SR-IOV? e.g.: enabling SR-IOV support/configuration, flavor management, tenant/quota relationships, specifiying the resources at instance boot, migration (if supported), compute node restart, etc. 13:21:25 <beagles> I've been looking at doing this, but don't want to repeat work that's already been done. 13:21:43 <beagles> (and yes, I pretyped that question into an editor... I can't type that fast) 13:21:54 <itzikb> :-) 13:22:00 <baoli> beagles, we started up with a google doc 13:22:24 <baoli> I can forward you all the docs folks in this subgroup has been working on 13:22:30 <beagles> that would be cool! 13:22:39 <baoli> after the meeting. 13:22:44 <sgordon> baoli, i think part of the problem at this point is there are too many docs 13:22:59 <beagles> sgordon beats me to the punch 13:23:03 <sgordon> in varying stages of completeness depending on how far through the cycle they were written 13:23:09 <irenab> beagles: I think it will be great if you can put all in one doc 13:23:17 <beagles> I wanted to bring it all under one roof 13:23:20 <sgordon> i think there needs to be a canonical design to get core attention, at least on the nova side 13:23:22 <beagles> (so to speak) 13:23:22 <sgordon> beagles, +1 13:23:43 <beagles> the other aspect... 13:23:46 <baoli> sgordon, I understand. We were trying very hard to converge 13:24:05 <irenab> beagles: There is still work to do to close details for nova APIs 13:24:36 <beagles> is that it will help us define functional subsets so we can say when certain features will be available... and also identify gaps that need to be closed for same. 13:25:02 <irenab> beagles: +1 13:25:52 <baoli> beagles, has you been able to follow the ML on pci passthrough and SRIOV? 13:26:26 <beagles> baoli, I've been playing catchup :) 13:27:00 <beagles> baoli, at the moment I have a bunch of silly stupid questions... each time I write one down, 15 minutes I find the answer somewhere :) 13:27:24 <baoli> I can compile a list and send to you guys. That way, you can see what have been discussed 13:28:28 <baoli> beagles, that's very productive, and I bet they are good questions 13:29:27 <irenab> beagles: you can send these questions to the team 13:29:42 <irenab> anyway, will be glad to help 13:30:15 <beagles> baoli, well... lol I don't know about that. Some are pretty ridiculous, but barring unforeseen stuff I should have a good list at the end of today and I'll send it out tot he ML 13:30:59 <baoli> beagles, looking forward to it. 13:31:57 <sadasu> I had an unrelated question 13:31:59 <irenab> rkukura: for your comment on nova bug, are you ok for now to skip the multi-segment extension and make dict for provider_net extension attributes? 13:32:57 <rkukura> irenab: I'd like the data model exposed within nova to support multiple segments, and include the other attributes 13:33:24 <rkukura> Its OK for now if it only uses the providernet extension and those has at most one segment 13:33:43 <rkukura> But I suspect going from that to the full implementation would only add a couple lines of code. 13:34:02 <rkukura> s/those/thus/ 13:34:54 <irenab> rkukura: ok, will see if can support both from day one 13:35:11 <baoli> rkukura, my understanding is that this bug is a temp fix that is only used by mlnx plugin 13:35:22 <irenab> it can be either multi-segment or provider extension, right? 13:35:57 <baoli> once incorporated with the sriov workflow, the fix will no longer be needed 13:36:03 <rkukura> baoli: I wasn't aware this was a temporary fix. How would it differ from the longer term fix? 13:36:28 <baoli> rkukura, did you read my comments in the review? 13:36:40 <irenab> Yes, we need to propagate physical network name to VIF Driver 13:37:15 <irenab> but I think that part that retrives physical network nbames can be added in way it supportes SRIOV scheduling 13:37:16 <rkukura> I see "With understanding that this fix is currently needed for mlnx ML2 plugin, I'm ok with the change." 13:37:47 <irenab> s/nbames/names 13:38:31 <rkukura> baoli: Reading other comments now 13:38:36 <irenab> So the only temporary part is adding physical_network name to network object of the VIF 13:40:15 <rkukura> baoli: your 2/13 comment on the workflow makes sense, I think 13:41:07 <rkukura> irenab: OK, I understand that the VIF driver needs this network info for the mlnx plugin, and the nova scheduler needs it for SR-IOV, right? 13:41:37 <irenab> rkukura: yes 13:41:47 <rkukura> And with SR-IOV, nova will set binding:profile:physical_network to indicate which segment is being used. 13:41:56 <rkukura> All sounds good to me. 13:42:09 <baoli> irenab, the physical network names are retrieved for scheduling time 13:42:35 <irenab> baoli: Agree , but you still will call neutronV2 api to get it, right? 13:42:37 <baoli> the acutal physical net used will be set on the compute node 13:42:57 <baoli> irenab, yes, we get it during scheduling 13:43:14 <irenab> so you still need method to get it 13:43:35 <baoli> irenab, the method to get it will be different from the one in the bug fix 13:44:11 <irenab> baoli:can you explain the difference? 13:44:31 <baoli> irenab, I have the method in my current patch. 13:44:48 <baoli> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/pci-passthrough-sriov 13:45:10 <baoli> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/67500/ actually 13:45:20 <irenab> OK, so just wondering what should be done here for now if any .... 13:45:58 <irenab> baloi: will look at it after the meeting 13:49:45 <sadasu> before the meeting ends, just wanted to check if we could have a sr-iov meeting on the Monday of the summit 13:50:09 <sadasu> we don't have a any neutron sessions on Monday 13:50:23 <sadasu> need to plan travel accordingly 13:50:35 <irenab> is there already agenda for the summit? 13:51:03 <sadasu> not detailed...but we know that Neutron design sessions got from Tue - Fri 13:51:13 <sadasu> s/got/go 13:52:33 <irenab> sadasu: any specific content for the sr-iov meeting? 13:53:03 <sadasu> just next steps and what we would be done in Juno 13:53:05 <irenab> I think we may need nova design session for what we call long term 13:53:16 <beagles> irenab, +1 13:53:17 <rkukura> sadasu: I'll plan to there on Monday, not sure what else may be happening that day, but sounds like a good opportunity 13:53:22 <sadasu> mostly in terms of Nova ... 13:53:33 <rkukura> when's the next SR-IOV IRC meeting? 13:53:49 <baoli> next tuesday 13:54:02 <baoli> we plan to switch back to weekly meeting 13:54:43 <beagles> baoli, same time? 13:54:50 <baoli> but anyone can propose a sync-up meeting during Monday-Thursday. 13:54:57 <baoli> beagles, yes 13:54:58 <sadasu> Is there a Nova design session for pci-passthrough planned? 13:55:09 <irenab> I think we should drive it 13:55:19 <sadasu> irenab, agreed.... 13:55:26 <heyongli> i have no idea now 13:55:32 <baoli> We should plan two sessions, one for nova and one for neutron 13:55:40 <rkukura> joint session? 13:55:50 <sadasu> joint session makes sense 13:55:58 <irenab> does it makes sence to have neutron aware scheduler session? 13:56:12 <sadasu> we need to present both pieces together to get/give the complete picture 13:56:32 <baoli> joint session is good. 13:57:06 <irenab> rkukura: any idea how to drive the joint session? 13:57:17 <sadasu> I think we need Nova flavor type discussion and something around neutron aware scheduling 13:57:39 <rkukura> I think proposing a similar session in both nova and neutron, and suggesting they be a join session, would do it. 13:58:05 <rkukura> Still might makes sense to get together Monday to prepare for a join session later in the week. 13:58:07 <irenab> we have also the nova boot API for --nic 13:58:10 <beagles> yeah, that should be pretty clear when proposing the sessions (scheduling and flavors) so they can try and work it that the folks driving scheduling on the nova side have minimal conflicts 13:58:38 <sadasu> baoli, is the discussion around using host aggregates done? 13:58:49 <beagles> rkukura, +1 13:59:00 <baoli> sadasu, not sure. 13:59:00 <irenab> seems we need IRC meeting (or few of them) to plan agenda for the summit 13:59:07 <beagles> :) 13:59:09 <rkukura> I nice picture of the workflow for SR-IOV with some sort of color coding of what's in icehouse, what's absolutely required, and what's nice to add would probably be all that's needed to driver a good discussion 13:59:24 <heyongli> aggregate discuss not closed by yunhong's update from meetup 13:59:32 <sadasu> rkukura, +1 13:59:43 <beagles> rkukura, sounds like the stuff I talked about would be a good place to start 13:59:52 <rkukura> beagles: +1 13:59:54 <baoli> rkukura, yes 14:00:04 <irenab> beagles: +1 14:00:09 <sadasu> I know we are not solving that problem in icehouse, would be great to discuss during the summit 14:00:37 <sadasu> host aggregates, I mean 14:00:40 <heyongli> sure 14:01:07 <sadasu> ok...so dfntly planning to be there on Monday for discussions 14:01:08 <irenab> I think that all user experience parts are not covered well for now 14:01:26 <sadasu> irenab, +1 14:01:54 <irenab> sadasu: agree. Hope to have flights to be there on Monday 14:02:07 <sadasu> lets work on the doc beagles suggested at start of meeting 14:02:27 <sadasu> with color coded diagram rkukura suggested 14:02:49 <sadasu> and then use that to put in proposal for joint session 14:02:51 <heyongli> next monday? 14:03:25 <irenab> rkukura: would you be avaialble later today or tomorrow for few mins to dicuss the nova bug fix? 14:03:43 <baoli> I think that we need to start with a recap on what we have discussed so far, plus the diagram 14:04:04 <rkukura> irenab: I'm booked most of this AM (EST) but later today or tomorrow would be fine 14:04:19 <irenab> so, next IRC meeting focusing on it? 14:04:34 <sadasu> irenab, it? 14:04:57 <rkukura> bye everyone - I've got another meeting to switch to 14:04:59 <irenab> sadasu: agenda you suggested 14:05:21 <sadasu> irenab: thanks :-) 14:05:30 <heyongli> bye 14:05:34 <baoli> ok, let's meet on Tues. 14:05:40 <sadasu> thanks everyone 14:05:42 <beagles> cheers! 14:05:47 <irenab> thanks, bye 14:06:06 <baoli> #endmeeting