[nova] [placement] [packaging] placement extraction check in meeting
mriedemos at gmail.com
Thu Jan 17 15:05:57 UTC 2019
On 1/17/2019 5:16 AM, Balázs Gibizer wrote:
> There is a functional test  that uses a fake virt driver and
> simulates rehape. My first attempt was to add an extra instance
> creation after the end of the reshape. But this test reshapes the
> provider tree to a way that the resulting tree uses sharing disk
> provider and doesn't have inventory on the compute node RP any more
> (cpu and mem moved under NUMA). Unfortunately nova does not yet support
> scheduling against such tree.
That's probably the one I mentioned on the call then. It uses a fake
virt driver but stubs out the update_provider_tree method (from what I
remember) and wouldn't be an easy fit for doing what I think we need to
do for a new functional test.
> Shall I try to add a new functional test with the fake virt driver or
> try to add a functional test with the libvirt driver top of the VGPU
> reshaper patch?
I'm personally OK with a fake virt driver (it could even be special
purpose like some of our fake virt drivers for testing things like live
migration rollback and resize failure/reschedule). Writing anything on
top of the libvirt driver is still going to require stubbing out large
parts of the libvirt driver code, which essentially makes it a fake
driver. I know we have some functional tests for the libvirt driver that
stub other stuff (Stephen is familiar with these) so it might be
possible, but if I were going to write a new test I'd just use a fake
virt driver and have the test be more like our traditional functional
tests where we use the API to create a server, then reshape to nested,
and then schedule another server to the nested resource class and assert
everything is OK, since I think what we're really trying to test here is
the API and scheduler interaction more than the virt driver itself.
More information about the openstack-discuss