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
CNF-7610: Mixed CPUs plugin deployment support #853
CNF-7610: Mixed CPUs plugin deployment support #853
Conversation
@Tal-or: This pull request references CNF-7610 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.15.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
@Tal-or: This pull request references CNF-7610 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.15.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Did we add validation already? we need to check how the shared pool composes with other pools. E.g. (purely random thoughts): not overlap with isolated or offlined, potentially a subset of reserved? not overlapping ALSO with reserved?
pkg/performanceprofile/controller/performanceprofile/components/kubeletconfig/kubeletconfig.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
It should not overlap with any of the sets. |
65d1442
to
4cf8654
Compare
@Tal-or: This pull request references CNF-7610 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.15.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
@Tal-or: This pull request references CNF-7610 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.15.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
4cf8654
to
1c36fb7
Compare
@Tal-or: This pull request references CNF-7610 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.15.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
05f045a
to
40b7803
Compare
depends on #858 |
a71b322
to
fe602d8
Compare
@Tal-or: This pull request references CNF-7610 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.15.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
/test e2e-gcp-pao |
/test e2e-gcp-pao |
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ | |||
package __mixedcpus_test |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we have already a 10_*
suite, so this should be 11_mixedcpus_...
IMO.
We also need to check (separately, but realized just now) we don't have hidden assumptions about the numerical prefix being single-digit. And (separately ofc) we probably should also rename the suites like 01_, 02_, ... 09_, 10_...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Changed to 11
thanks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/approve
looks very good. Non-binding LGTM, want to have another pass later and give chance to others to review.
test/e2e/performanceprofile/functests/10_mixedcpus/mixedcpus.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
test/e2e/performanceprofile/functests/10_mixedcpus/mixedcpus.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ffromani, Tal-or The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
/test e2e-gcp-pao |
validates that shared cpus are not overlapping with any of the other CPU sets Signed-off-by: Talor Itzhak <titzhak@redhat.com>
4ecf57f
to
2de3e30
Compare
/hold |
Need to reprovision my cluster to validate FG integration |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
as discussed offline, the missing comments about e2e tests will be handled as followup PR
The lane is falling consistently maybe the issue is real. working to figure it out |
suggests there could be a pod being deleted and not yet gone, or that in general the cluster state is polluted somehow when the tests runs. |
/test e2e-gcp-pao |
There's an issue with the PR: but since the existing CRIO version that is running in the CI is not familiar with this new annotation (PR is till open: cri-o/cri-o#7502) it would failed to validate the Bottom line: |
[...]
...and let the CI infra consume the updated package once released. Is that feasible under the current timeline constraints? [edit] the only other option coming to mind is to merge this functionality disabled by default, merge the e2e tests but make them SKIP as early as possible. |
Feature gates sealing should be perfect and provide 0 changes to configuration in case mixed CPUs feature gates is off. Hence, we don\'t want to add the `cpu-shared.crio.io` annotation to CRI-O allowed annotation in case it's off. Signed-off-by: Talor Itzhak <titzhak@redhat.com>
E2E tests that verifies the deployment done by PAO controller. Mainly checks of the configuration files integrity. Signed-off-by: Talor Itzhak <titzhak@redhat.com>
2de3e30
to
4e30eab
Compare
I removed the annotation in case the FG disabled. This should remove the change from the |
/lgtm |
/hold cancel |
/test e2e-hypershift |
@Tal-or: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
This PR contains set of changes that are needed for MixedCPUs feature support:
The feature is optional and off by default.
E2E tests will be added in a separate PR since this PR alone doesn't provide any added functionality and depends on other changes.
Related to:
EP: openshift/enhancements@76ea48a