New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Edge-RM CH02] New Profile for Edge ( vRAN ,..) #1569
Comments
Compute-optimized was intended as a 'better' version of basic; either faster vCores, or more vCores. FPGAs are an entirely different computational paradigm, using entirely different binaries (FPGA bitstreams), rather than x86 instruction sets. For this reason, I would recommend introducing this as a FPGA profile. |
RM meeting 2020-05-13: We are not opposed to a cloud infrastructure profile for FPGA, but need vendor-independent characterization of the FPGA adapter card capabilities prior to defining the profile. |
thanks all for our discussion today, we will continue to cover this in edge meeting 2020-05-14 |
I was told that even today it is possible to design a very low capacity FlexRAN solution without FPGA. To be verified what this really means but I think highlights that we need to be careful about assuming a profile is dependent on any particular acceleration technology. |
I agree with @trevgc that CNTT should not assume that it is impossible to run a specific workload without some special HW that might make the workload run more efficient or live up to hard characteristics requirements. There is however a need in all cases to specify the characteristics needs from the workloads and the characteristics capabilities from the infrastructure resource instances in any deployed Cloud Infrastructure. These characteristics needs to be expressed in a way that make sense both for the workload and the resource provider. It think it would be very good if the involved subject matter expert around the 4 use cases could have a first suggestion about what characteristics matter and see if they could express them in a technology independent way, but still be useful for the resource provisioning when inserting an FPGA, GPU or SmartNIC PCIe card. |
Dear All, IMHO, I'll go for the creation of a new edge profile, and it should be techology-independent if possible... Remember that we aim at several edge use-cases, and we can have FPGAs, GPUs, eASICs, etc. out there :) This is not easy, I know... Thanks. |
I do agree. We need to define the characteristics of the use cases and map that to technology independent aspects. Let me group some initial characteristics of the use cases and post it for group review. I prefer creating a new profile for the edge but we need to document the use cases characteristics as an initial step. |
@kedmison @petorre @trevgc @rabi-abdel @Karimrabie @lucisuciu @TFredberg https://wiki.lfnetworking.org/display/LN/2020-05-14+-+%5BCNTT+EDGE%5D+-+Meeting+Agenda+and+Minutes @petorre , it will great if you can have it by next meeting |
Initial lines in: Compared to other workloads and HW profiles: |
@petorre , can you prepare some details for the next meeting |
As per our the last Edge meeting ( 11 of June ), we will go to define a new profile called "Edge Profile" I will start the PR to cover it |
PR #1692 closed w/o merge. This issue will be addressed in next release. |
Dears, this issue for more decision about how can we cover the vRAN or/and any workload required the same requirements ( FPGA ) at the edge, we agreed during Edge meeting that we need to have a new profile so
we have 2 options :
1- Re-activate the Compute intensive
2- Create a new profile ( proposed by Kelvin as well )
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: