[openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network support
Ian Wells
ijw.ubuntu at cack.org.uk
Tue Dec 17 15:09:00 UTC 2013
Reiterating from the IRC mneeting, largely, so apologies.
Firstly, I disagree that
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PCI_passthrough_SRIOV_support is an
accurate reflection of the current state. It's a very unilateral view,
largely because the rest of us had been focussing on the google document
that we've been using for weeks.
Secondly, I totally disagree with this approach. This assumes that
description of the (cloud-internal, hardware) details of each compute node
is best done with data stored centrally and driven by an API. I don't
agree with either of these points.
Firstly, the best place to describe what's available on a compute node is
in the configuration on the compute node. For instance, I describe which
interfaces do what in Neutron on the compute node. This is because when
you're provisioning nodes, that's the moment you know how you've attached
it to the network and what hardware you've put in it and what you intend
the hardware to be for - or conversely your deployment puppet or chef or
whatever knows it, and Razor or MAAS has enumerated it, but the activities
are equivalent. Storing it centrally distances the compute node from its
descriptive information for no good purpose that I can see and adds the
complexity of having to go make remote requests just to start up.
Secondly, even if you did store this centrally, it's not clear to me that
an API is very useful. As far as I can see, the need for an API is really
the need to manage PCI device flavors. If you want that to be API-managed,
then the rest of a (rather complex) API cascades from that one choice.
Most of the things that API lets you change (expressions describing PCI
devices) are the sort of thing that you set once and only revisit when you
start - for instance - deploying new hosts in a different way.
I at the parallel in Neutron provider networks. They're config driven,
largely on the compute hosts. Agents know what ports on their machine (the
hardware tie) are associated with provider networks, by provider network
name. The controller takes 'neutron net-create ... --provider:network
'name'' and uses that to tie a virtual network to the provider network
definition on each host. What we absolutely don't do is have a complex
admin API that lets us say 'in host aggregate 4, provider network x (which
I made earlier) is connected to eth6'.
--
Ian.
On 17 December 2013 03:12, yongli he <yongli.he at intel.com> wrote:
> On 2013年12月16日 22:27, Robert Li (baoli) wrote:
>
> Hi Yongli,
>
> The IRC meeting we have for PCI-Passthrough is the forum for discussion
> on SR-IOV support in openstack. I think the goal is to come up with a plan
> on both the nova and neutron side in support of the SR-IOV, and the current
> focus is on the nova side. Since you've done a lot of work on it already,
> would you like to lead tomorrow's discussion at UTC 1400?
>
>
> Robert , you lead the meeting very well i enjoy you setup every for us,
> keep going on it -:)
>
> I'd like to give you guy a summary of current state, let's discuss it
> then.
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PCI_passthrough_SRIOV_support
>
>
> 1) fade out alias ( i think this ok for all)
> 2) white list became pic-flavor ( i think this ok for all)
> 3) address simply regular expression support: only * and a number range
> is support [hex-hex]. ( i think this ok?)
> 4) aggregate : now it's clear enough, and won't impact SRIOV. ( i think
> this irrelevant to SRIOV now)
>
>
> 5) SRIOV use case, if you suggest a use case, please given a full example
> like this: [discuss: compare to other solution]
>
>
> - create a pci flavor for the SRIOV
>
>
> nova pci-flavor-create name 'vlan-SRIOV' description "xxxxx"
> nova pci-flavor-update UUID set 'description'='xxxx' 'address'= '0000:01:*.7'
>
>
> Admin config SRIOV
>
> - create pci-flavor :
>
>
> {"name": "privateNIC", "neutron-network-uuid": "uuid-1", ...}
> {"name": "publicNIC", "neutron-network-uuid": "uuid-2", ...}
> {"name": "smallGPU", "neutron-network-uuid": "", ...}
>
>
> - set aggregate meta according the flavors existed in the hosts
>
> flavor extra-specs, for a VM that gets two small GPUs and VIFs attached
> from the above SRIOV NICs:
>
>
> nova aggregate-set-metadata pci-aware-group set 'pci-flavor'='smallGPU,oldGPU, privateNIC,privateNIC'
>
>
> - create instance flavor for sriov
>
>
> nova flavor-key 100 set 'pci-flavor='1:privateNIC; 1: publicNIC; 2:smallGPU,oldGPU'
>
>
> - User just specifies a quantum port as normal:
>
>
> nova boot --flavor "sriov-plus-two-gpu" --image img --nic net-id=uuid-2 --nic net-id=uuid-1 vm-name
>
>
>
> Yongli
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Robert
>
> On 12/11/13 8:09 PM, "He, Yongli" <yongli.he at intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, all
>
> Please continue to foucs on the blueprint, it change after reviewing. And
> for this point:
>
>
>
>
> >5. flavor style for sriov: i just list the flavor style in the design but
> for the style
> > --nic
> > --pci-flavor PowerfullNIC:1
> > still possible to work, so what's the real impact to sriov from the
> flavor design?
>
>
>
> >As you can see from the log, Irena has some strong opinions on this, and
> I tend to agree with her. The problem we need to solve is this: we need a
> means to associate a nic (or port) with a PCI device that is allocated out
> of a PCI >flavor or a PCI group. We think that we presented a complete
> solution in our google doc.
>
> It’s not so clear, could you please list the key point here. Btw, the blue
> print I sent Monday had changed for this, please check.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yongli he
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Robert Li (baoli) [mailto:baoli at cisco.com <baoli at cisco.com>]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 11, 2013 10:18 PM
> *To:* He, Yongli; Sandhya Dasu (sadasu); OpenStack Development Mailing
> List (not for usage questions); Jiang, Yunhong; Irena Berezovsky;
> prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com; chris.friesen at windriver.com; Itzik Brown;
> john at johngarbutt.com
> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network
> support
>
>
>
> Hi Yongli,
>
>
>
> Thank you very much for sharing the Wiki with us on Monday so that we have
> a better understanding on your ideas and thoughts. Please see embedded
> comments.
>
>
>
> --Robert
>
>
>
> On 12/10/13 8:35 PM, "yongli he" <yongli.he at intel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2013年12月10日 22:41, Sandhya Dasu (sadasu) wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to resurrect this email thread since discussions have split
> between several threads and is becoming hard to keep track.
>
>
>
> An update:
>
>
>
> New PCI Passthrough meeting time: Tuesdays UTC 1400.
>
>
>
> New PCI flavor proposal from Nova:
>
>
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PCI_configration_Database_and_API#Take_advantage_of_host_aggregate_.28T.B.D.29
>
> Hi, all
> sorry for miss the meeting, i was seeking John at that time. from the
> log i saw some concern about new design, i list them there and try to
> clarify it per my opinion:
>
> 1. configuration going to deprecated: this might impact SRIOV. if
> possible, please list what kind of impact make to you.
>
>
>
> Regarding the nova API pci-flavor-update, we had a face-to-face discussion
> over use of a nova API to provision/define/configure PCI passthrough list
> during the ice-house summit. I kind of like the idea initially. As you can
> see from the meeting log, however, I later thought that in a distributed
> system, using a centralized API to define resources per compute node, which
> could come and go any time, doesn't seem to provide any significant
> benefit. This is the reason that I didn't mention it in our google doc
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EMwDg9J8zOxzvTnQJ9HwZdiotaVstFWKIuKrPse6JOs/edit#
>
>
>
> If you agree that pci-flavor and pci-group is kind of the same thing, then
> we agree with you that the pci-flavor-create API is needed. Since
> pci-flavor or pci-group is global, then such an API can be used for
> resource registration/validation on nova server. In addition, it can be
> used to facilitate the display of PCI devices per node, per group, or in
> the entire cloud, etc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2. <baoli>So the API seems to be combining the whitelist + pci-group
> yeah, it's actually almost same thing, 'flavor' 'pci-group' or
> 'group'. the real different is this flavor going to deprecated the alias,
> and combine tight to aggregate or flavor.
>
>
>
> Well, with pci-group, we recommended to deprecate the PCI alias because we
> think it is redundant.
>
>
>
> We think that specification of PCI requirement in the flavor's extra spec
> is still needed as it's a generic means to allocate PCI devices. In
> addition, it can be used as properties in the host aggregate as well.
>
>
>
>
>
> 3. feature:
> this design is not to say the feature is not work, but changed. if
> auto discovery feature is possible, we got 'feature' form the device, then
> use the feature to define the pci-flavor. it's also possible create
> default pci-flavor for this. so the feature concept will be impact, my
> feeling, we should given a separated bp for feature, and not in this round
> change, so here we only thing is keep the feature is possible.
>
>
>
> I think that it's ok to have separate BPs. But we think that auto
> discovery is an essential part of the design, and therefore it should be
> implemented with more helping hands.
>
>
>
>
>
> 4. address regular expression: i'm fine with the wild-match style.
>
>
>
> Sounds good. One side node is that I noticed that the driver for intel
> 82576 cards has a strange slot assignment scheme. So the final definition
> of it may need to accommodate that as well.
>
>
>
> 5. flavor style for sriov: i just list the flavor style in the design but
> for the style
> --nic
> --pci-flavor PowerfullNIC:1
> still possible to work, so what's the real impact to sriov from the
> flavor design?
>
>
>
> As you can see from the log, Irena has some strong opinions on this, and I
> tend to agree with her. The problem we need to solve is this: we need a
> means to associate a nic (or port) with a PCI device that is allocated out
> of a PCI flavor or a PCI group. We think that we presented a complete
> solution in our google doc.
>
>
>
>
>
> At this point, I really believe that we should combine our efforts and
> ideas. As far as how many BPs are needed, it should be a trivial matter
> after we have agreed on a complete solution.
>
>
>
> Yongli He
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sandhya
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Sandhya Dasu <sadasu at cisco.com>
> *Reply-To: *"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
> questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> *Date: *Thursday, November 7, 2013 9:44 PM
> *To: *"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
> openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>, "Jiang, Yunhong" <
> yunhong.jiang at intel.com>, "Robert Li (baoli)" <baoli at cisco.com>, Irena
> Berezovsky <irenab at mellanox.com>, "prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com" <
> prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com>, "chris.friesen at windriver.com" <
> chris.friesen at windriver.com>, "He, Yongli" <yongli.he at intel.com>, Itzik
> Brown <ItzikB at mellanox.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network
> support
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> The discussions during the summit were very productive. Now, we are
> ready to setup our IRC meeting.
>
>
>
> Here are some slots that look like they might work for us.
>
>
>
> 1. Wed 2 – 3 pm UTC.
>
> 2. Thursday 12 – 1 pm UTC.
>
> 3. Thursday 7 – 8pm UTC.
>
>
>
> Please vote.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sandhya
>
>
>
> *From: *Sandhya Dasu <sadasu at cisco.com>
> *Reply-To: *"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
> questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> *Date: *Tuesday, November 5, 2013 12:03 PM
> *To: *"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
> openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>, "Jiang, Yunhong" <
> yunhong.jiang at intel.com>, "Robert Li (baoli)" <baoli at cisco.com>, Irena
> Berezovsky <irenab at mellanox.com>, "prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com" <
> prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com>, "chris.friesen at windriver.com" <
> chris.friesen at windriver.com>, "He, Yongli" <yongli.he at intel.com>, Itzik
> Brown <ItzikB at mellanox.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network
> support
>
>
>
> Just to clarify, the discussion is planned for 10 AM Wednesday morning at
> the developer's lounge.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sandhya
>
>
>
> *From: *Sandhya Dasu <sadasu at cisco.com>
> *Reply-To: *"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
> questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> *Date: *Tuesday, November 5, 2013 11:38 AM
> *To: *"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
> openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>, "Jiang, Yunhong" <
> yunhong.jiang at intel.com>, "Robert Li (baoli)" <baoli at cisco.com>, Irena
> Berezovsky <irenab at mellanox.com>, "prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com" <
> prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com>, "chris.friesen at windriver.com" <
> chris.friesen at windriver.com>, "He, Yongli" <yongli.he at intel.com>, Itzik
> Brown <ItzikB at mellanox.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network
> support
>
>
>
> *Hi,*
>
> * We are planning to have a discussion at the developer's lounge
> tomorrow morning at 10:00 am. Please feel free to drop by if you are
> interested.*
>
>
>
> *Thanks,*
>
> *Sandhya*
>
>
>
> *From: *<Jiang>, Yunhong <yunhong.jiang at intel.com>
>
> *Date: *Thursday, October 31, 2013 6:21 PM
> *To: *"Robert Li (baoli)" <baoli at cisco.com>, Irena Berezovsky <
> irenab at mellanox.com>, "prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com" <
> prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com>, "chris.friesen at windriver.com" <
> chris.friesen at windriver.com>, "He, Yongli" <yongli.he at intel.com>, Itzik
> Brown <ItzikB at mellanox.com>
> *Cc: *OpenStack Development Mailing List <
> openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>, "Brian Bowen (brbowen)" <
> brbowen at cisco.com>, "Kyle Mestery (kmestery)" <kmestery at cisco.com>,
> Sandhya Dasu <sadasu at cisco.com>
> *Subject: *RE: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network
> support
>
>
>
> Robert, I think your change request for pci alias should be covered by the
> extra infor enhancement.
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/pci-extra-info and Yongli is
> working on it.
>
>
>
> I’m not sure how the port profile is passed to the connected switch, is it
> a Cisco VMEFX specific method or libvirt method? Sorry I’m not well on
> network side.
>
>
>
> --jyh
>
>
>
> *From:* Robert Li (baoli) [mailto:baoli at cisco.com <baoli at cisco.com>]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 30, 2013 10:13 AM
> *To:* Irena Berezovsky; Jiang, Yunhong; prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com;
> chris.friesen at windriver.com; He, Yongli; Itzik Brown
> *Cc:* OpenStack Development Mailing List; Brian Bowen (brbowen); Kyle
> Mestery (kmestery); Sandhya Dasu (sadasu)
> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network
> support
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Regarding physical network mapping, This is what I thought.
>
>
>
> consider the following scenarios:
>
> 1. a compute node with SRIOV only interfaces attached to a physical
> network. the node is connected to one upstream switch
>
> 2. a compute node with both SRIOV interfaces and non-SRIOV interfaces
> attached to a physical network. the node is connected to one upstream switch
>
> 3. in addition to case 1 &2, a compute node may have multiple vNICs
> that are connected to different upstream switches.
>
>
>
> CASE 1:
>
> -- the mapping from a virtual network (in terms of neutron) to a physical
> network is actually done by binding a port profile to a neutron port. With
> cisco's VM-FEX, a port profile is associated with one or multiple vlans.
> Once the neutron port is bound with this port-profile in the upstream
> switch, it's effectively plugged into the physical network.
>
> -- since the compute node is connected to one upstream switch, the
> existing nova PCI alias will be sufficient. For example, one can boot a
> Nova instance that is attached to a SRIOV port with the following command:
>
> nova boot —flavor m1.large —image <image-id> --nic
> net-id=<net>,pci-alias=<alias>,sriov=<direct|macvtap>,port-profile=<profile>
>
> the net-id will be useful in terms of allocating IP address, enable
> dhcp, etc that is associated with the network.
>
> -- the pci-alias specified in the nova boot command is used to create a
> PCI request for scheduling purpose. a PCI device is bound to a neutron port
> during the instance build time in the case of nova boot. Before invoking
> the neutron API to create a port, an allocated PCI device out of a PCI
> alias will be located from the PCI device list object. This device info
> among other information will be sent to neutron to create the port.
>
>
>
> CASE 2:
>
> -- Assume that OVS is used for the non-SRIOV interfaces. An example of
> configuration with ovs plugin would look like:
>
> bridge_mappings = physnet1:br-vmfex
>
> network_vlan_ranges = physnet1:15:17
>
> tenant_network_type = vlan
>
> When a neutron network is created, a vlan is either allocated or
> specified in the neutron net-create command. Attaching a physical interface
> to the bridge (in the above example br-vmfex) is an administrative task.
>
> -- to create a Nova instance with non-SRIOV port:
>
> nova boot —flavor m1.large —image <image-id> --nic net-id=<net>
>
> -- to create a Nova instance with SRIOV port:
>
> nova boot —flavor m1.large —image <image-id> --nic
> net-id=<net>,pci-alias=<alias>,sriov=<direct|macvtap>,port-profile=<profile>
>
> it's essentially the same as in the first case. But since the net-id
> is already associated with a vlan, the vlan associated with the
> port-profile must be identical to that vlan. This has to be enforced by
> neutron.
>
> again, since the node is connected to one upstream switch, the
> existing nova PCI alias should be sufficient.
>
>
>
> CASE 3:
>
> -- A compute node might be connected to multiple upstream switches, with
> each being a separate network. This means SRIOV PFs/VFs are already
> implicitly associated with physical networks. In the none-SRIOV case, a
> physical interface is associated with a physical network by plugging it
> into that network, and attaching this interface to the ovs bridge that
> represents this physical network on the compute node. In the SRIOV case, we
> need a way to group the SRIOV VFs that belong to the same physical
> networks. The existing nova PCI alias is to facilitate PCI device
> allocation by associating <product_id, vendor_id> with an alias name. This
> will no longer be sufficient. But it can be enhanced to achieve our goal.
> For example, the PCI device domain, bus (if their mapping to vNIC is fixed
> across boot) may be added into the alias, and the alias name should be
> corresponding to a list of tuples.
>
>
>
> Another consideration is that a VF or PF might be used on the host for
> other purposes. For example, it's possible for a neutron DHCP server to be
> bound with a VF. Therefore, there needs a method to exclude some VFs from a
> group. One way is to associate an exclude list with an alias.
>
>
>
> The enhanced PCI alias can be used to support features other than neutron
> as well. Essentially, a PCI alias can be defined as a group of PCI devices
> associated with a feature. I'd think that this should be addressed with a
> separate blueprint.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Robert
>
>
>
> On 10/30/13 12:59 AM, "Irena Berezovsky" <irenab at mellanox.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Please see my answers inline
>
>
>
> *From:* Jiang, Yunhong [mailto:yunhong.jiang at intel.com<yunhong.jiang at intel.com>]
>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:17 PM
> *To:* Irena Berezovsky; Robert Li (baoli); prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com;
> chris.friesen at windriver.com; He, Yongli; Itzik Brown
> *Cc:* OpenStack Development Mailing List; Brian Bowen (brbowen); Kyle
> Mestery (kmestery); Sandhya Dasu (sadasu)
> *Subject:* RE: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network
> support
>
>
>
> Your explanation of the virtual network and physical network is quite
> clear and should work well. We need change nova code to achieve it,
> including get the physical network for the virtual network, passing the
> physical network requirement to the filter properties etc.
>
> *[IrenaB] * The physical network is already available to nova at
> networking/nova/api at as virtual network attribute, it then passed to the
> VIF driver. We will push soon the fix to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1239606 ; which will provide general
> support for getting this information.
>
>
>
> For your port method, so you mean we are sure to passing network id to
> ‘nova boot’ and nova will create the port during VM boot, am I right?
> Also, how can nova knows that it need allocate the PCI device for the
> port? I’d suppose that in SR-IOV NIC environment, user don’t need specify
> the PCI requirement. Instead, the PCI requirement should come from the
> network configuration and image property. Or you think user still need
> passing flavor with pci request?
>
> *[IrenaB] There are two way to apply port method. One is to pass network
> id on nova boot and use default type as chosen in the neutron config file
> for vnic type. Other way is to define port with required vnic type and
> other properties if applicable, and run ‘nova boot’ with port id argument.
> Going forward with nova support for PCI devices awareness, we do need a way
> impact scheduler choice to land VM on suitable Host with available PC
> device that has the required connectivity.*
>
>
>
> --jyh
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Irena Berezovsky [mailto:irenab at mellanox.com <irenab at mellanox.com>]
>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:17 AM
> *To:* Jiang, Yunhong; Robert Li (baoli); prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com;
> chris.friesen at windriver.com; He, Yongli; Itzik Brown
> *Cc:* OpenStack Development Mailing List; Brian Bowen (brbowen); Kyle
> Mestery (kmestery); Sandhya Dasu (sadasu)
> *Subject:* RE: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network
> support
>
>
>
> Hi Jiang, Robert,
>
> IRC meeting option works for me.
>
> If I understand your question below, you are looking for a way to tie up
> between requested virtual network(s) and requested PCI device(s). The way
> we did it in our solution is to map a provider:physical_network to an
> interface that represents the Physical Function. Every virtual network is
> bound to the provider:physical_network, so the PCI device should be
> allocated based on this mapping. We can map a PCI alias to the
> provider:physical_network.
>
>
>
> Another topic to discuss is where the mapping between neutron port and PCI
> device should be managed. One way to solve it, is to propagate the
> allocated PCI device details to neutron on port creation.
>
> In case there is no qbg/qbh support, VF networking configuration should
> be applied locally on the Host.
>
> The question is when and how to apply networking configuration on the PCI
> device?
>
> We see the following options:
>
> ‧ it can be done on port creation.
>
> ‧ It can be done when nova VIF driver is called for vNIC
> plugging. This will require to have all networking configuration available
> to the VIF driver or send request to the neutron server to obtain it.
>
> ‧ It can be done by having a dedicated L2 neutron agent on each
> Host that scans for allocated PCI devices and then retrieves networking
> configuration from the server and configures the device. The agent will be
> also responsible for managing update requests coming from the neutron
> server.
>
>
>
> For macvtap vNIC type assignment, the networking configuration can be
> applied by a dedicated L2 neutron agent.
>
>
>
> BR,
>
> Irena
>
>
>
> *From:* Jiang, Yunhong [mailto:yunhong.jiang at intel.com<yunhong.jiang at intel.com>]
>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:04 AM
>
>
> *To:* Robert Li (baoli); Irena Berezovsky; prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com;
> chris.friesen at windriver.com; He, Yongli; Itzik Brown
> *Cc:* OpenStack Development Mailing List; Brian Bowen (brbowen); Kyle
> Mestery (kmestery); Sandhya Dasu (sadasu)
> *Subject:* RE: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network
> support
>
>
>
> Robert, is it possible to have a IRC meeting? I’d prefer to IRC meeting
> because it’s more openstack style and also can keep the minutes clearly.
>
>
>
> To your flow, can you give more detailed example. For example, I can
> consider user specify the instance with –nic option specify a network id,
> and then how nova device the requirement to the PCI device? I assume the
> network id should define the switches that the device can connect to , but
> how is that information translated to the PCI property requirement? Will
> this translation happen before the nova scheduler make host decision?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> --jyh
>
>
>
> *From:* Robert Li (baoli) [mailto:baoli at cisco.com <baoli at cisco.com>]
> *Sent:* Monday, October 28, 2013 12:22 PM
> *To:* Irena Berezovsky; prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com; Jiang, Yunhong;
> chris.friesen at windriver.com; He, Yongli; Itzik Brown
> *Cc:* OpenStack Development Mailing List; Brian Bowen (brbowen); Kyle
> Mestery (kmestery); Sandhya Dasu (sadasu)
> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network
> support
>
>
>
> Hi Irena,
>
>
>
> Thank you very much for your comments. See inline.
>
>
>
> --Robert
>
>
>
> On 10/27/13 3:48 AM, "Irena Berezovsky" <irenab at mellanox.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> Thank you very much for sharing the information regarding your efforts.
> Can you please share your idea of the end to end flow? How do you suggest
> to bind Nova and Neutron?
>
>
>
> The end to end flow is actually encompassed in the blueprints in a
> nutshell. I will reiterate it in below. The binding between Nova and
> Neutron occurs with the neutron v2 API that nova invokes in order to
> provision the neutron services. The vif driver is responsible for plugging
> in an instance onto the networking setup that neutron has created on the
> host.
>
>
>
> Normally, one will invoke "nova boot" api with the —nic options to specify
> the nic with which the instance will be connected to the network. It
> currently allows net-id, fixed ip and/or port-id to be specified for the
> option. However, it doesn't allow one to specify special networking
> requirements for the instance. Thanks to the nova pci-passthrough work, one
> can specify PCI passthrough device(s) in the nova flavor. But it doesn't
> provide means to tie up these PCI devices in the case of ethernet adpators
> with networking services. Therefore the idea is actually simple as
> indicated by the blueprint titles, to provide means to tie up SRIOV devices
> with neutron services. A work flow would roughly look like this for 'nova
> boot':
>
>
>
> -- Specifies networking requirements in the —nic option.
> Specifically for SRIOV, allow the following to be specified in addition to
> the existing required information:
>
> . PCI alias
>
> . direct pci-passthrough/macvtap
>
> . port profileid that is compliant with 802.1Qbh
>
>
>
> The above information is optional. In the absence of them, the
> existing behavior remains.
>
>
>
> -- if special networking requirements exist, Nova api creates PCI
> requests in the nova instance type for scheduling purpose
>
>
>
> -- Nova scheduler schedules the instance based on the requested
> flavor plus the PCI requests that are created for networking.
>
>
>
> -- Nova compute invokes neutron services with PCI passthrough
> information if any
>
>
>
> -- Neutron performs its normal operations based on the request, such
> as allocating a port, assigning ip addresses, etc. Specific to SRIOV, it
> should validate the information such as profileid, and stores them in its
> db. It's also possible to associate a port profileid with a neutron network
> so that port profileid becomes optional in the —nic option. Neutron returns
> nova the port information, especially for PCI passthrough related
> information in the port binding object. Currently, the port binding object
> contains the following information:
>
> binding:vif_type
>
> binding:host_id
>
> binding:profile
>
> binding:capabilities
>
>
>
> -- nova constructs the domain xml and plug in the instance by calling
> the vif driver. The vif driver can build up the interface xml based on the
> port binding information.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The blueprints you registered make sense. On Nova side, there is a need to
> bind between requested virtual network and PCI device/interface to be
> allocated as vNIC.
>
> On the Neutron side, there is a need to support networking configuration
> of the vNIC. Neutron should be able to identify the PCI device/macvtap
> interface in order to apply configuration. I think it makes sense to
> provide neutron integration via dedicated Modular Layer 2 Mechanism Driver
> to allow PCI pass-through vNIC support along with other networking
> technologies.
>
>
>
> I haven't sorted through this yet. A neutron port could be associated with
> a PCI device or not, which is a common feature, IMHO. However, a ML2 driver
> may be needed specific to a particular SRIOV technology.
>
>
>
>
>
> During the Havana Release, we introduced Mellanox Neutron plugin that
> enables networking via SRIOV pass-through devices or macvtap interfaces.
>
> We want to integrate our solution with PCI pass-through Nova support. I
> will be glad to share more details if you are interested.
>
>
>
>
>
> Good to know that you already have a SRIOV implementation. I found out
> some information online about the mlnx plugin, but need more time to get to
> know it better. And certainly I'm interested in knowing its details.
>
>
>
> The PCI pass-through networking support is planned to be discussed
> during the summit: http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/129. I think
> it’s worth to drill down into more detailed proposal and present it during
> the summit, especially since it impacts both nova and neutron projects.
>
>
>
> I agree. Maybe we can steal some time in that discussion.
>
>
>
> Would you be interested in collaboration on this effort? Would you be
> interested to exchange more emails or set an IRC/WebEx meeting during this
> week before the summit?
>
>
>
> Sure. If folks want to discuss it before the summit, we can schedule a
> webex later this week. Or otherwise, we can continue the discussion with
> email.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Irena
>
>
>
> *From:* Robert Li (baoli) [mailto:baoli at cisco.com <baoli at cisco.com>]
> *Sent:* Friday, October 25, 2013 11:16 PM
> *To:* prashant.upadhyaya at aricent.com; Irena Berezovsky;
> yunhong.jiang at intel.com; chris.friesen at windriver.com; yongli.he at intel.com
> *Cc:* OpenStack Development Mailing List; Brian Bowen (brbowen); Kyle
> Mestery (kmestery); Sandhya Dasu (sadasu)
> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network
> support
>
>
>
> Hi Irena,
>
>
>
> This is Robert Li from Cisco Systems. Recently, I was tasked to
> investigate such support for Cisco's systems that support VM-FEX, which is
> a SRIOV technology supporting 802-1Qbh. I was able to bring up nova
> instances with SRIOV interfaces, and establish networking in between the
> instances that employes the SRIOV interfaces. Certainly, this was
> accomplished with hacking and some manual intervention. Based on this
> experience and my study with the two existing nova pci-passthrough
> blueprints that have been implemented and committed into Havana (
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/pci-passthrough-base and
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/pci-passthrough-libvirt), I
> registered a couple of blueprints (one on Nova side, the other on the
> Neutron side):
>
>
>
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/pci-passthrough-sriov
>
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/pci-passthrough-sriov
>
>
>
> in order to address SRIOV support in openstack.
>
>
>
> Please take a look at them and see if they make sense, and let me know any
> comments and questions. We can also discuss this in the summit, I suppose.
>
>
>
> I noticed that there is another thread on this topic, so copy those folks
> from that thread as well.
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Robert
>
>
>
> On 10/16/13 4:32 PM, "Irena Berezovsky" <irenab at mellanox.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> As one of the next steps for PCI pass-through I would like to discuss is
> the support for PCI pass-through vNIC.
>
> While nova takes care of PCI pass-through device resources management and
> VIF settings, neutron should manage their networking configuration.
>
> I would like to register asummit proposal to discuss the support for PCI
> pass-through networking.
>
> I am not sure what would be the right topic to discuss the PCI
> pass-through networking, since it involve both nova and neutron.
>
> There is already a session registered by Yongli on nova topic to discuss
> the PCI pass-through next steps.
>
> I think PCI pass-through networking is quite a big topic and it worth to
> have a separate discussion.
>
> Is there any other people who are interested to discuss it and share their
> thoughts and experience?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Irena
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131217/18c1d998/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the OpenStack-dev
mailing list