The PCI extra information support in icehouse release
This is to enhance the Nova generic PCI passthrough , to support one SR-IOV NIC passthrough requirement in IceHouse release.
It has go through a long discussion for SR-IOV NIC support in openstack and most of conclusion has been achieved, see https:/
One all-agreed key requirement for PCI SR-IOV NIC support is to provide additional information to the PCI devices and scheduler can make decision based on these extra information. This requirement can be very helpful to other scenario also. This BP target for this requirement.
See https:/
Blueprint information
- Status:
- Not started
- Approver:
- None
- Priority:
- Undefined
- Drafter:
- jiang, yunhong
- Direction:
- Needs approval
- Assignee:
- jiang, yunhong
- Definition:
- New
- Series goal:
- None
- Implementation:
-
Unknown
- Milestone target:
- None
- Started by
- Completed by
Related branches
Related bugs
Sprints
Whiteboard
I find the reference spec very confusing. It says PCI_flavor will be added later, but then later says it will add that to a NIC in icehouse. You don't say why this might be useful.
There seem to be lots of inconsistencies in the examples, some things are lists, other times they are dicts, doesn't given the on file configuration format, etc.
Given the current spec, I can't quite see how the configuration works in a backwards compatible way, and what extra headaches it might cause migrating to the full idea.
I don't like the --nic extensions, we need the neutron pieces in place first, if its not a symetric change with port creation, we have a totally borken API
--johnthetubaguy
Updated according to your feedback.
deferred from icehouse-3 to "next": http://
Removed from next, as next is now reserved for near misses from the last milestone --johnthetubaguyI find the reference spec very confusing. It says PCI_flavor will be added later, but then later says it will add that to a NIC in icehouse. You don't say why this might be useful.
There seem to be lots of inconsistencies in the examples, some things are lists, other times they are dicts, doesn't given the on file configuration format, etc.
Given the current spec, I can't quite see how the configuration works in a backwards compatible way, and what extra headaches it might cause migrating to the full idea.
I don't like the --nic extensions, we need the neutron pieces in place first, if its not a symetric change with port creation, we have a totally borken API
--johnthetubaguy
Updated according to your feedback.
deferred from icehouse-3 to "next": http://
Removed from next, as next is now reserved for near misses from the last milestone --johnthetubaguy
If you are still working on this, please re-submit via nova-specs. If not, please mark as obsolete, and add a quick comment to describe why. --johnthetubaguy (20th April 2014)
