Skip to content
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

Resync 20240529 #200

Merged
merged 33 commits into from
May 29, 2024
Merged

Resync 20240529 #200

merged 33 commits into from
May 29, 2024

Conversation

ffromani
Copy link
Member

resync with the tip of the upstream master branch

consume the new ephemeral storage fixes

googs1025 and others added 30 commits May 1, 2024 23:04
"host-level" resources are resources which are not
expected to have NUMA affinity. This means
that these resources not showing up in per-NUMA
resource counters should not prevent per se scheduling
on a given node.

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com>
We call "NUMA-affine" resources compute resources like
CPU and memory/hugepages which we know they do
expose NUMA affinity.

This is another attempt to factor this logic in a central place.

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com>
…sources

[noderesourcetopology] improve classification of resources
Problem: the comment and associated docs should say if
there are not resources available needed for the group,
the scheduler should not start any.
Solution: update all references anyone->any.

It could also be stated "not start any one" but
"not start any" is a more natural way to say it

Signed-off-by: vsoch <vsoch@users.noreply.github.com>
so that we can use site as chart repo

Signed-off-by: Wei Zhang <kweizh@gmail.com>
Add ARG for base image customization
* add crd(podgroup, elasticquotas) field

* fix: crd field type

Signed-off-by: googs1025 <googs1025@gmail.com>

---------

Signed-off-by: googs1025 <googs1025@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: googs1025 <googs1025@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Xiaodong Ye <yeahdongcn@gmail.com>
before kubernetes-sigs#710 and kubernetes-sigs#725, we logged the container being processed alongside
the pod (identified by namespace/name pair).
It was dropped by mistake and not deliberately.
This is useful information when troubleshooting, so let's add it back.

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com>
The ephemeral storage resource is not a deciding factor
for noderesourcetopology filtering, but it was incorrectly
accounted causing bad scheduling decisions.
First, we add some integration test coverage to catch
these issues.

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com>
Rewrite the accounting of NUMA-local resources when
using scope=container. The previous code was too lenient
and worked mostly by side effects when dealing with
non-NUMA affine resources.

A non-NUMA affine resource (aka a hostlevel resource)
is a resource which is not guaranteed to always have
a NUMA affinity. CPU and memory (incl. hugepages) always do,
but devices may or may not, both options are legal for
device plugins.

Similarly, ephemeral storage is a prominent example of resource
which should never have a NUMA affinity.
The accounting in this case was wrong because previously the
resource was considered NUMA affine.

Note: it's legal to configure topology updaters (e.g. NFD)
to not advertise CPU and memory in NRT objects.
Thus is best to treat lack of them as warnings, not
as blocking errors.

However if the per-NUMA affine counters go negative
this is definitely an error condition we need to detect
and be very loud about it.

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com>
plugin.go should contain only entry point and
orchestration code. Let's move all the utilties and logic
to other source code files.

Trivial code movement with minimal renames.

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com>
[noderesourcetopology] rewrite accounting of numa-affine resources with scope=container
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from swatisehgal and Tal-or May 29, 2024 11:13
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 29, 2024
Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com>
@Tal-or
Copy link
Collaborator

Tal-or commented May 29, 2024

/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 29, 2024
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented May 29, 2024

[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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@ffromani ffromani merged commit 609cf8c into master May 29, 2024
7 checks passed
@ffromani ffromani deleted the resync-20240529 branch May 29, 2024 11:30
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants