Open Stack

Hi Robert,
I think that I can go with Bob's suggestion, but think it makes sense to cover the vnic_type and PCI-passthru via two separate patches. Adding vnic_type will probably impose changes to existing Mech. Drivers while PCI-passthru is about introducing some pieces for new SRIOV supporting Mech. Drivers.

More comments inline

BR,
IRena

From: Robert Li (baoli) [mailto:baoli at cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 4:47 PM
To: Irena Berezovsky; rkukura at redhat.com; Sandhya Dasu (sadasu); OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] PCI pass-through SRIOV on Jan. 29th

Hi folks,

I'd like to do a recap on today's meeting, and if possible we should continue the discussion in this thread so that we can be more productive in tomorrow's meeting.

Bob suggests that we have these BPs:
One generic covering implementing binding:profile in ML2, and one specific to PCI-passthru, defining the vnic-type (wherever it goes) and any keys for binding:profile.


Irena suggests that we have three BPs:
1. generic ML2 support for binding:profile (corresponding to Bob's covering implementing binding:profile in ML2 ?)
2. add vnic_type support for binding Mech Drivers in ML2 plugin
3. support PCI slot via profile (corresponding to Bob's any keys for binding:profile ?)

Both proposals sound similar, so it's great that we are converging. I think that it's important that we put more details in each BP on what's exactly covered by it. One question I have is about where binding:profile will be implemented. I see that portbinding is defined/implemented under its extension and neutron.db. So when both of you guys are saying that implementing binding:profile in ML2, I'm kind of confused. Please let me know what I'm missing here. My understanding is that non-ML2 plugin can use it as well.
[IrenaB] Basically you  are right. Currently ML2 does not inherit the DB Mixin for port binding. So it supports the port binding extension, but uses its own DB table to store relevant attributes. Making it work for ML2 means not adding this support to PortBindingMixin.

Another issue that came up during the meeting is about whether or not vnic-type should be part of the top level binding or part of binding:profile. In other words, should it be defined as binding:vnic-type or binding:profile:vnic-type.
[IrenaB] As long as existing binding capable Mech Drivers will take vnic_type into its consideration, I guess doing it via binding:profile will introduce less changes all over (CLI, API). But I am not sure this reason is strong enough to choose this direction
We also need one or two BPs to cover the change in the neutron port-create/port-show CLI/API.
[IrenaB] binding:profile is already supported, so it probably depends on direction with vnic_type

Another thing is that we need to define the binding:profile dictionary.
[IrenaB] With regards to PCI SRIOV related attributes, right?

Thanks,
Robert



On 1/29/14 4:02 AM, "Irena Berezovsky" <irenab at mellanox.com<mailto:irenab at mellanox.com>> wrote:

Will attend

From: Robert Li (baoli) [mailto:baoli at cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 12:55 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] PCI pass-through SRIOV on Jan. 29th

Hi Folks,

Can we have one more meeting tomorrow? I'd like to discuss the blueprints we are going to have and what each BP will be covering.

thanks,
Robert
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140129/fcefbb3c/attachment.html>