On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Joe Gordon <joe.gord...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Roman Bogorodskiy > <rbogorods...@mirantis.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> In discussion of this spec proposal: >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/127827/ it was suggested by Joe Gordon >> to start a discussion on the mailing list. >> >> So I'll share my thoughts and a long term plan on adding FreeBSD host >> support for OpenStack. >> >> An ultimate goal is to allow using libvirt/bhyve as a compute driver. >> However, I think it would be reasonable to start with libvirt/qemu >> support first as it will allow to prepare the ground. > > > Before diving into the technical details below, I have one question. Why, > What is the benefit of this, besides the obvious 'we not support FreeBSD'? > Adding support for a new kernel introduces yet another column in our support > matrix, and will require a long term commitment to testing and maintaining > OpenStack on FreeBSD.
There a number of FreeBSD users that are interested in virtualization and an effective management of the virtualized resources. Using OpenStack would be much more convenient than using some custom scripts / home grown solutions people usually use now. >> >> >> High level overview of what needs to be done: >> >> - Nova >> * linux_net needs to be re-factored to allow to plug in FreeBSD >> support (that's what the spec linked above is about) >> * nova.virt.disk.mount needs to be extended to support FreeBSD's >> mdconfig(8) in a similar way to Linux's losetup >> - Glance and Keystone >> These components are fairly free of system specifics. Most likely >> they will require some small fixes like e.g. I made for Glance >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94100/ >> - Cinder >> I didn't look close at Cinder from a porting perspective, tbh. >> Obviously, it'll need some backend driver that would work on >> FreeBSD, e.g. ZFS. I've seen some patches floating around for ZFS >> though. Also, I think it'll need an implementation of iSCSI stack >> on FreeBSD, because it has its own stack, not stgt. On the other >> hand, Cinder is not required for a minimal installation and that >> could be done after adding support of the other components. > > > What about neutron? We are in the process of trying to deprecate > nova-network, so any new thing needs to support neutron. AFAIK, there's no defined migration plan yet, unless I missed that. Anyway, I don't see any blockers regarding an implementation of a driver similar to linuxbridge that'd work on FreeBSD. Also, Semihalf guys are working on OpenContail/FreeBSD and Neutron/OpenContrial support, so that's an option as well. >> >> >> Also, it's worth to mention that a discussion on this topic already >> happened on this maillist: >> >> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-March/031431.html >> >> Some of the limitations were resolved since then, specifically, >> libvirt/bhyve has no limitation on count of disk and ethernet devices >> anymore. >> >> Roman Bogorodskiy > > _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackemail@example.com http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev