Adding networker ovs dpdk CR #1280

Jaganathancse · 2025-01-28T10:28:42Z

This changes to add new nodeset CR for networker ovs dpdk.

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-01-28T12:52:21Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/69056a251ac840629e73619e1bc58c24

✔️ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider SUCCESS in 2h 10m 19s
❌ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc FAILURE in 1h 18m 46s
❌ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal FAILURE in 1h 24m 23s
❌ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode FAILURE in 1h 56m 20s

christophefontaine

The global diff should be similar to a diff between a classic compute node nic-config vs a dpdk-enabled compute node nic-config.

christophefontaine · 2025-01-29T14:26:14Z

config/samples/dataplane/networker_ovs_dpdk/values.yaml

+            - type: ovs_bridge
+              name: {{ neutron_physical_bridge_name }}
+              mtu: {{ min_viable_mtu }}
+              use_dhcp: false
+              dns_servers: {{ ctlplane_dns_nameservers }}
+              domain: {{ dns_search_domains }}
+              addresses:
+              - ip_netmask: {{ ctlplane_ip }}/{{ ctlplane_cidr }}
+              routes: {{ ctlplane_host_routes }}
+              members:
+              - type: interface
+                name: nic1
+                mtu: {{ min_viable_mtu }}
+                # force the MAC address of the bridge to this interface
+                primary: true
+            {% for network in nodeset_networks if network not in ["external", "tenant"] %}
+              - type: vlan
+                mtu: {{ lookup('vars', networks_lower[network] ~ '_mtu') }}
+                vlan_id: {{ lookup('vars', networks_lower[network] ~ '_vlan_id') }}
+                addresses:
+                - ip_netmask:
+                {{ lookup('vars', networks_lower[network] ~ '_ip') }}/{{ lookup('vars', networks_lower[network] ~ '_cidr') }}
+                    routes: {{ lookup('vars', networks_lower[network] ~ '_host_routes') }}
+            {% endfor %}


we must not mix ovs_bridge and ovs_user_bridge in a single deployment.
Here, we should have the control plane on top of a linux interface or a linux bond:

- type: interface name: nic1 mtu: {{ ctlplane_mtu }} use_dhcp: false addresses: - ip_netmask: {{ ctlplane_ip }}/{{ ctlplane_cidr }} routes: {{ ctlplane_host_routes }} - type: linux_bond name: bond_api mtu: {{ min_viable_mtu }} bonding_options: {{ edpm_bond_interface_ovs_options }} use_dhcp: false dns_servers: {{ ctlplane_dns_nameservers }} members: - type: interface name: nic2 mtu: {{ min_viable_mtu }} primary: true - type: interface name: nic3 mtu: {{ min_viable_mtu }}

Then you'd add additional vlans (if required) for the other osp networks {% if network not in ["external", "tenant"] %}

we must not mix ovs_bridge and ovs_user_bridge in a single deployment. Here, we should have the control plane on top of a linux interface or a linux bond:

- type: interface name: nic1 mtu: {{ ctlplane_mtu }} use_dhcp: false addresses: - ip_netmask: {{ ctlplane_ip }}/{{ ctlplane_cidr }} routes: {{ ctlplane_host_routes }} - type: linux_bond name: bond_api mtu: {{ min_viable_mtu }} bonding_options: {{ edpm_bond_interface_ovs_options }} use_dhcp: false dns_servers: {{ ctlplane_dns_nameservers }} members: - type: interface name: nic2 mtu: {{ min_viable_mtu }} primary: true - type: interface name: nic3 mtu: {{ min_viable_mtu }}

Then you'd add additional vlans (if required) for the other osp networks {% if network not in ["external", "tenant"] %}

done

openshift-ci · 2025-01-29T14:26:25Z

@christophefontaine: changing LGTM is restricted to collaborators

In response to this:

The global diff should be similar to a diff between a classic compute node nic-config vs a dpdk-enabled compute node nic-config.

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-sigs/prow repository.

openshift-ci · 2025-03-06T09:15:28Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Jaganathancse
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign lewisdenny for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

Jaganathancse · 2025-03-06T10:14:33Z

The global diff should be similar to a diff between a classic compute node nic-config vs a dpdk-enabled compute node nic-config.

done

christophefontaine

quick review, looks good to me.

christophefontaine · 2025-03-06T10:23:49Z

config/samples/dataplane/networker_ovs_dpdk/values.yaml

+              - type: ovs_dpdk_bond
+                name: dpdkbond0
+                mtu: 9000
+                rx_queue: 4


If my calculation is correct, we have 24 queues, and 34 pmd threads for ovs, right ?
If we hit any performance limit (and I doubt that we will with 10Gb interfaces), keep in mind that we can still increase the number of queues to spread the load.

If my calculation is correct, we have 24 queues, and 34 pmd threads for ovs, right ? If we hit any performance limit (and I doubt that we will with 10Gb interfaces), keep in mind that we can still increase the number of queues to spread the load.

ack

Jaganathancse · 2025-03-06T11:26:52Z

recheck

christophefontaine

ack. lgtm.

Jaganathancse · 2025-03-06T13:44:59Z

recheck

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-03-06T15:53:28Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/f68fc3ea1ef646aa9f43a384300f2c42

✔️ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider SUCCESS in 2h 07m 16s
✔️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SUCCESS in 1h 12m 08s
❌ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal FAILURE in 1h 35m 36s
❌ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode FAILURE in 1h 50m 47s

Jaganathancse · 2025-03-10T04:54:47Z

recheck

Jaganathancse · 2025-03-10T05:16:13Z

recheck

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-03-10T06:40:08Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/3dd23c7785de41a793e818791f73ad55

✔️ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider SUCCESS in 1h 43m 54s
✔️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SUCCESS in 1h 13m 40s
❌ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal RETRY_LIMIT in 13m 39s
✔️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SUCCESS in 1h 28m 13s

This changes to add new nodeset CR for networker ovs dpdk.

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-03-25T05:40:50Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/48d08eb74349485a96fc41d274c4a952

✔️ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider SUCCESS in 1h 49m 05s
✔️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SUCCESS in 1h 09m 35s
❌ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal FAILURE in 1h 32m 33s
✔️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SUCCESS in 1h 29m 06s
❌ openstack-operator-kuttl FAILURE in 28m 42s (non-voting)

openshift-ci · 2025-08-11T18:15:48Z

@Jaganathancse: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
ci/prow/openstack-operator-build-deploy-kuttl	`3561d1b`	link	true	`/test openstack-operator-build-deploy-kuttl`

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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

openshift-ci bot requested review from olliewalsh and slagle January 28, 2025 10:28

Jaganathancse force-pushed the networker-dpdk branch 2 times, most recently from 1b70b33 to 6de2309 Compare January 28, 2025 10:40

Jaganathancse force-pushed the networker-dpdk branch from 6de2309 to 5206594 Compare January 29, 2025 14:23

christophefontaine suggested changes Jan 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

Jaganathancse force-pushed the networker-dpdk branch 2 times, most recently from bcf917d to a6d3b76 Compare February 6, 2025 11:11

Jaganathancse force-pushed the networker-dpdk branch from a6d3b76 to b701942 Compare March 6, 2025 09:15

Jaganathancse force-pushed the networker-dpdk branch 2 times, most recently from e05774e to 384a0c8 Compare March 6, 2025 09:37

Jaganathancse requested a review from christophefontaine March 6, 2025 10:16

Jaganathancse force-pushed the networker-dpdk branch from 384a0c8 to a007c7e Compare March 6, 2025 10:17

christophefontaine reviewed Mar 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

Jaganathancse force-pushed the networker-dpdk branch 2 times, most recently from 31cb949 to 7176a78 Compare March 6, 2025 10:50

Jaganathancse requested a review from christophefontaine March 6, 2025 10:56

christophefontaine reviewed Mar 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

Jaganathancse force-pushed the networker-dpdk branch from 7176a78 to 86acb78 Compare March 24, 2025 06:21

Jaganathancse requested a review from christophefontaine March 25, 2025 03:30

[WIP] Adding networker ovs dpdk CR

3561d1b

This changes to add new nodeset CR for networker ovs dpdk.

Jaganathancse force-pushed the networker-dpdk branch from 86acb78 to 3561d1b Compare March 25, 2025 03:50

Adding networker ovs dpdk CR #1280

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Adding networker ovs dpdk CR #1280

Uh oh!

Conversation

Jaganathancse commented Jan 28, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Jan 28, 2025

Uh oh!

christophefontaine left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

christophefontaine Jan 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Jaganathancse Mar 6, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 29, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

Jaganathancse commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

christophefontaine left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

christophefontaine Mar 6, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Jaganathancse Mar 6, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Jaganathancse commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

christophefontaine left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Jaganathancse commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

Jaganathancse commented Mar 10, 2025

Uh oh!

Jaganathancse commented Mar 10, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Mar 10, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Mar 25, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 11, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 11, 2025 •

edited

Loading