Open Stack

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 3:13 AM, Saravanan KR <skramaja at redhat.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The aim of this mail is to ease the DPDK deployment with TripleO. I
> would like to see if the approach of deriving THT parameter based on
> introspection data, with a high level input would be feasible.
>
> Let me brief on the complexity of certain parameters, which are
> related to DPDK. Following parameters should be configured for a good
> performing DPDK cluster:
> * NeutronDpdkCoreList (puppet-vswitch)
> * ComputeHostCpusList (PreNetworkConfig [4], puppet-vswitch) (under review)
> * NovaVcpuPinset (puppet-nova)
>
> * NeutronDpdkSocketMemory (puppet-vswitch)
> * NeutronDpdkMemoryChannels (puppet-vswitch)
> * ComputeKernelArgs (PreNetworkConfig [4]) (under review)
> * Interface to bind DPDK driver (network config templates)
>
> The complexity of deciding some of these parameters is explained in
> the blog [1], where the CPUs has to be chosen in accordance with the
> NUMA node associated with the interface. We are working a spec [2], to
> collect the required details from the baremetal via the introspection.
> The proposal is to create mistral workbook and actions
> (tripleo-common), which will take minimal inputs and decide the actual
> value of parameters based on the introspection data. I have created
> simple workbook [3] with what I have in mind (not final, only
> wireframe). The expected output of this workflow is to return the list
> of inputs for "parameter_defaults",  which will be used for the
> deployment. I would like to hear from the experts, if there is any
> drawbacks with this approach or any other better approach.
>
> This workflow will ease the TripleO UI need to integrate DPDK, as UI
> (user) has to choose only the interface for DPDK [and optionally, the
> number for CPUs required for PMD and Host]. Of-course, the
> introspection should be completed, with which, it will be easy to
> deploy a DPDK cluster.
>
> There is a complexity if the cluster contains heterogeneous nodes, for
> example a cluster having HP and DELL machines with different CPU
> layout, we need to enhance the workflow to take actions based on
> roles/nodes, which brings in a requirement of localizing the above
> mentioned variables per role. For now, consider this proposal for
> homogeneous cluster, if there is a value in this, I will work towards
> heterogeneous clusters too.
>
> Please share your thoughts.

Using Mistral workflows for this use-case seems valuable to me. I like
your step-by-step approach and also the fact it will ease TripleO UI
with this proposal.

> Regards,
> Saravanan KR
>
>
> [1] https://krsacme.github.io/blog/post/dpdk-pmd-cpu-list/
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/396147/
> [3] https://gist.github.com/krsacme/c5be089d6fa216232d49c85082478419
> [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/411797/6/extraconfig/pre_network/host_config_and_reboot.role.j2.yaml
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



-- 
Emilien Macchi