----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vladik Romanovsky" <vladik.romanov...@enovance.com>
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> Hi everyone,
> Following Steve Gordon's email [1], regarding CI for NUMA, SR-IOV, and other
> features, I'd like to start a discussion about the NUMA testing in
> particular.
> Recently we have started a work to test some of these features.
> The current plan is to use the functional tests, in the Nova tree, to
> exercise
> the code paths for NFV use cases. In general, these will contain tests
> to cover various scenarios regarding NUMA, CPU pinning, large pages and
> validate a correct placement/scheduling.

Hi Vladik,

There was some discussion of the above at the Nova mid-cycle yesterday, are you 
able to give a quick update on any progress with regards to creation of the 
above functional tests?

> In addition to the functional tests in Nova, we have also proposed two basic
> scenarios in Tempest [2][3]. One to make sure that an instance can boot
> with a
> minimal NUMA configuration (a topology that every host should have) and
> one that would request an "impossible" topology and fail with an expected
> exception.

We also discussed the above tempest changes and they will likely receive some 
more review cycles as a result of this discussion but it looks like there is 
already some feedback from Nikola that needs to be addressed. More broadly for 
the list it looks like we need to determine whether adding a negative test in 
this case is a valid/desireable use of Tempest.



OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Reply via email to