On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 6:35 AM, Derek Higgins <der...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi All, > I've been working on a set of patches as a WIP to test ironic in the > overcloud[1], the approach I've started with is to add ironic into the > overcloud controller in scenario004. Also to run a script on the controller > (as a NodeExtraConfigPost) that sets up a VM with vbmc that can then be > controlled by ironic. The WIP currently replaces the current tempest tests > with some commands to sanity test the setup. This essentially works but > things need to be cleaned up a bit so I've a few questions > > o Is scenario004 the correct choice? > Because we might increase the timeout risk on scenario004, I would recommend to create a new dedicated scenario that would deploy a very basic overcloud with just ironic + dependencies (keystone, glance, neutron, and nova?) > > o Should I create a new tempest test for baremetal as some of the > networking stuff is different? > I think we would need to run baremetal tests for this new featureset, see existing files for examples. > > o Is running a script on the controller with NodeExtraConfigPost the best > way to set this up or should I be doing something with quickstart? I don't > think quickstart currently runs things on the controler does it? > What kind of thing do you want to run exactly? I'll let the CI squad replies as well but I think we need a new scenario, that we would only run when touching ironic files in tripleo. Using scenario004 really increase the risk of timeout and we don't want it. Thanks for this work! -- Emilien Macchi
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
