Open Stack

On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Roman Bogorodskiy <
rbogorodskiy at mirantis.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In discussion of this spec proposal:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/127827/ it was suggested by Joe Gordon
> to start a discussion on the mailing list.
>
> So I'll share my thoughts and a long term plan on adding FreeBSD host
> support for OpenStack.
>
> An ultimate goal is to allow using libvirt/bhyve as a compute driver.
> However, I think it would be reasonable to start with libvirt/qemu
> support first as it will allow to prepare the ground.
>

Before diving into the technical details below, I have one question. Why,
What is the benefit of this, besides the obvious 'we not support FreeBSD'?
Adding support for a new kernel introduces yet another column in our
support matrix, and will require a long term commitment to testing and
maintaining OpenStack on FreeBSD.



>
> High level overview of what needs to be done:
>
>  - Nova
>   * linux_net needs to be re-factored to allow to plug in FreeBSD
>     support (that's what the spec linked above is about)
>   * nova.virt.disk.mount needs to be extended to support FreeBSD's
>     mdconfig(8) in a similar way to Linux's losetup
>  - Glance and Keystone
>     These components are fairly free of system specifics. Most likely
>     they will require some small fixes like e.g. I made for Glance
>     https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94100/
>  - Cinder
>     I didn't look close at Cinder from a porting perspective, tbh.
>     Obviously, it'll need some backend driver that would work on
>     FreeBSD, e.g. ZFS. I've seen some patches floating around for ZFS
>     though. Also, I think it'll need an implementation of iSCSI stack
>     on FreeBSD, because it has its own stack, not stgt. On the other
>     hand, Cinder is not required for a minimal installation and that
>     could be done after adding support of the other components.
>

What about neutron? We are in the process of trying to deprecate
nova-network, so any new thing needs to support neutron.


>
> Also, it's worth to mention that a discussion on this topic already
> happened on this maillist:
>
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-March/031431.html
>
> Some of the limitations were resolved since then, specifically,
> libvirt/bhyve has no limitation on count of disk and ethernet devices
> anymore.
>
> Roman Bogorodskiy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20141020/0150866a/attachment.html>