Hey Manuel, Always happy to have help! :)
I think I need to verify I can deploy XCI first before tossing CI at it, as that tends to add more complexity. The runners in Gitlab are analagous to machines in Jenkins, with the exception that 1 runner = 1 executor; to add more executors on a server you'd need to start more runner processes. But to do a baremetal deployment I would just need to reserve the 6 servers in LaaS and connect the jumpserver as the runner. Regards, Trevor Bramwell On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 03:43:32PM +0000, Manuel Buil wrote: > Hello Trevor, > > Cool! Thanks. > > If you want we work together to try to understand why it fails for XCI. That > way we will probably find gaps. > > Note that you are doing a "virtual" deployment, where controller and computes > are in VMs. When you were reading the documentation, did you find a way to > deploy baremetal? > > Thanks, > Manuel > > ________________________________ > From: opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org <opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> on behalf of > Trevor Bramwell <tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org> > Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 12:10 AM > To: Manuel Buil <mb...@suse.com> > Cc: ahot...@cisco.com <ahot...@cisco.com>; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>; opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org > <opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> > Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] Can installers use CircleCI? > > Hi Manuel, Alec, et al. > > I finished up a guide[1] for setting up repos on CircleCI, Gitlab-CI, > and Azure Pipelines for testing these proof-of-concepts (PoCs). > > Hopefully this will help anyone who has the cycles to dig into these > platforms and find if they'll meet our needs. > > It was pretty easy to get a machine from LaaS connected up the Gitlab-CI > and attempt to run XCI[2] (though I've yet to successfully deploy it), > and I don't think I'll have any issues trying to connect it to Azure > Pipelines. From what I know of CircleCI it will take a bit more work > though as it can only SSH out, and that would require first setting up > the VPN connection. > > Regards, > Trevor Bramwell > > [1] https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/PoC+Setup > [2] https://gitlab.com/bramweltci/releng-xci/pipelines > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 04:49:42PM +0000, Manuel Buil wrote: > > Thanks for sharing the details Alec. It sounds like an interesting PoC and > > will give us a lot of insights đ. > > > > I also think those baremetal features will be hard to get but that needs to > > be investigated. By your information, I am also realizing that multi-distro > > is not supported and we are tight to the images they offer, which are not > > that many, just ubuntu-1604. For example, by looking at Airship's CI, they > > use ubuntu-1804 for OpenStack Stein or later, so we would not be able to > > deploy it in CircleCI. Not sure how much influence we could have over > > CircleCI to get multi-distro support đ. > > > > > > Regards, > > Manuel > > ________________________________ > > From: opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org <opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> on behalf of > > Alec via Lists.Opnfv.Org <ahothan=cisco....@lists.opnfv.org> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 5:53 PM > > To: Manuel Buil > > Cc: opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org > > Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] Can installers use CircleCI? > > > > > > Hi Manuel, > > > > > > > > I doubt circleci can do any of the features you describe below other than > > perhaps nested virtualization (VM in VM). > > > > Circle ci is great to build software and do unit testing of it, what you > > need for the below is a bare metal cloud such as packet.net or OPNFV LaaS. > > > > You can chose between a few flavors of VMs or docker containers to run your > > workload (https://circleci.com/docs/2.0/configuration-reference/#machine) > > > > I donât see how they can provide anything closer to bare metal. > > > > > > > > I am planning to test circleci to do the following with nfvbench: > > > > * Build VM images and push them to a VM image repo > > * Build docker containers and push them to docker hub > > > > Unit testing that does not require any HW dependencies > > > > Nothing really extraordinary⌠> > > > My project is a good example of tool that is highly dependent on NIC > > hardware and kernel settings. If I canât control those by API Iâm pretty > > much limited to SW unit testing. > > > > > > > > The only way to test an installer is to run it on a set of âfriendlyâ bare > > metal servers where you can > > > > * Select the NIC to use (or be sure youâre landing on a server that has > > proper NIC) > > * control by API the bare metal SW setup (linux boot) > > * control by API the switch where your server is wired > > > > > > > > The devil is in the detail especially when it comes to mapping openstack to > > the underlying networking layer. > > > > You can get away with nested virtualization but that is hardly comparable > > to the real installation process in production đ > > > > The level of details required for production deployers of openstack is > > excruciatingly difficult. > > > > > > > > HTH > > > > > > > > Alec > > > > > > > > > > > > From: <opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> on behalf of Manuel Buil <mb...@suse.com> > > Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 at 8:09 AM > > To: TSC OPNFV <opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> > > Subject: [opnfv-tsc] Can installers use CircleCI? > > > > > > > > Hey guys, > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, we ran out of time so I could not ask. I think we all agree > > by saying that installers are key projects in OPNFV and they are the > > biggest consumers of our current jenkins CI, so we should probably try one > > of those in the PoC. In fact, the usual way of deploying a scenario is > > through an installer, right? So most projects depend on them. > > > > > > > > There are some installer requirements that I am not sure whether CircleCI > > supports: > > > > > > > > 1 - Access to hosts that support IOMMU virtualization > > > > 2 - Access to hosts that have NICs that support DPDK > > > > 3 - Access to hosts with NICs that support SR-IOV > > > > 4 - Access to hosts with CPUs that support NUMA > > > > 5 - Support of multiple distros (laas now supports CentOS, openSUSE and > > Ubuntu) > > > > 6 - Nested virtualization to support non-baremetal scenarios > > > > 7 - Multihost jobs for baremetal deployments > > > > 8 - pdf/idf descriptor to characterize the hosts > > > > 9 - Complete isolation of broadcast domains to be able to PXE boot (esp. > > across hosts in multihost deployments) > > > > 10 - ... > > > > > > > > Probably there are others that I forgot, that's why I think it is important > > to do a PoC with installers before taking any decision. Note that some of > > those requirements are already part of the CNTT ref. model draft (still > > work on-going), for example section 5.3.1: > > > > > > > > https://github.com/cntt-n/CNTT/blob/03f0fc47f998936af927d2c8e5e84a0aceafe09b/doc/ref_model/chapters/chapter05.md#531virtual-network-acceleration > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Manuel > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > > > > View/Reply Online (#5394): https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tsc/message/5394 > > Mute This Topic: https://lists.opnfv.org/mt/32405816/557206 > > Group Owner: opnfv-tsc+ow...@lists.opnfv.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tsc/unsub > > [tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org] > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#23436): https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/message/23436 Mute This Topic: https://lists.opnfv.org/mt/32648168/21656 Group Owner: opnfv-tech-discuss+ow...@lists.opnfv.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
