On 8/7/2018 1:10 AM, Flint WALRUS wrote:
I didn’t had time to check StarlingX code quality, how did you feel it while you were doing your analysis?
I didn't dig into the test diffs themselves, but it was my impression that from what I was poking around in the local git repo, there were several changes which didn't have any test coverage.
For the really big full stack changes (L3 CAT, CPU scaling and shared/pinned CPUs on same host), toward the end I just started glossing over a lot of that because it's so much code in so many places, so I can't really speak very well to how it was written or how well it is tested (maybe WindRiver had a more robust CI system running integration tests, I don't know).
There were also some things which would have been caught in code review upstream. For example, they ignore the "force" parameter for live migration so that live migration requests always go through the scheduler. However, the "force" parameter is only on newer microversions. Before that, if you specified a host at all it would bypass the scheduler, but the change didn't take that into account, so they still have gaps in some of the things they were trying to essentially disable in the API.
On the whole I think the quality is OK. It's not really possible to accurately judge that when looking at a single diff this large.
-- Thanks, Matt _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
