HI, all cause of the Juno, the PCI discuss keen open, for group VS to flavor/extra-information based solution. there is a use case, which group based solution can not supported well.
please considerate of this, and choose the flavor/extra-information based solution. Groups problem: I: exposed may detail under laying grouping to user, user burden of deal with those things. and in a OS system, the group name might be messy. refer to II) -------------------------- II: group based solution can not well support such a simple use case: user want a faster NIC from Intel to join a virtual networking. suppose the tenant use physical network name is "phy1". then the 'group' style solution won't meeting such a simple use case. reason: 1) the group name must be 'phy1', otherwise, the neutron can't not fill the pci request, the neutron have only the physical network name for this. (suppose the phy1 not bothering the user, if bothering user, user will see group like : the "intel_phy1" "ciscio_v1_phy1".... ) 2) because there is only one property in pci stats pool, user then loose the chance to choice the version or model of the pci device, then user can not request a simple thing like the "intel-NIC" or "1G_NIC. Regards Yongli He _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev