Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
Hi, As for the Devstack it requires some rebasing work (not necessarily straightforward) in order to push the changes upstream. As for the neutron, it should not be difficult to port FreeBSD networking support (we have some code in our forked repos) from nova-network to neutron plugin. Regards, Michal On 30 October 2014 12:21, Roman Bogorodskiy bogorods...@gmail.com wrote: Monty Taylor wrote: On 10/27/2014 06:39 AM, Michael Still wrote: On Tuesday, October 21, 2014, Roman Bogorodskiy rbogorods...@mirantis.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Roman Bogorodskiy rbogorods...@mirantis.com javascript:; wrote: [snip] 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 [snip] 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. I have no problem with supporting FreeBSD as a hypervisor operating system, especially if there is a solid team on the FreeBSD side that will commit to maintaining the changes required and adding the necessary CI (especially ensuring that when it breaks it gets fixed). I believe that the CI related things that would be needed would be: - solid devstack support - someone willing to step up and make sure that nodepool can provide freebsd images like ianw recently did with centos Semihalf guys implemented FreeBSD support devstack as well (Michał CCed): https://github.com/Semihalf/openstack-devstack I don't know if they did an attempt to push these changes back. Creating FreeBSD images is not hard and I could do that. Anyway, there are some points regarding the CI that are not quite clear to me. - Should it be a 3rd party CI or integrated to the main CI? - At what point we want to start tempest/devstack testing over FreeBSD? I think it'll take quite some time to make these pass (maybe several release cycles). However, I see Neutron support as a firm requirement. We've spent a large amount of time getting closer and closer to deprecating nova-network. Despite opening it up for limited development again, I don't think we should be making the transition plan harder by introducing new features that don't work with Neutron. I agree with Mikal on this. Good. It doesn't look like a problem to me to bring the support into Neutron over nova-network. After a brief view the level of effort for the Neutron implementation is not much higher comparing to nova-network. Roman Bogorodskiy ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
Monty Taylor wrote: On 10/27/2014 06:39 AM, Michael Still wrote: On Tuesday, October 21, 2014, Roman Bogorodskiy rbogorods...@mirantis.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Roman Bogorodskiy rbogorods...@mirantis.com javascript:; wrote: [snip] 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 [snip] 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. I have no problem with supporting FreeBSD as a hypervisor operating system, especially if there is a solid team on the FreeBSD side that will commit to maintaining the changes required and adding the necessary CI (especially ensuring that when it breaks it gets fixed). I believe that the CI related things that would be needed would be: - solid devstack support - someone willing to step up and make sure that nodepool can provide freebsd images like ianw recently did with centos Semihalf guys implemented FreeBSD support devstack as well (Michał CCed): https://github.com/Semihalf/openstack-devstack I don't know if they did an attempt to push these changes back. Creating FreeBSD images is not hard and I could do that. Anyway, there are some points regarding the CI that are not quite clear to me. - Should it be a 3rd party CI or integrated to the main CI? - At what point we want to start tempest/devstack testing over FreeBSD? I think it'll take quite some time to make these pass (maybe several release cycles). However, I see Neutron support as a firm requirement. We've spent a large amount of time getting closer and closer to deprecating nova-network. Despite opening it up for limited development again, I don't think we should be making the transition plan harder by introducing new features that don't work with Neutron. I agree with Mikal on this. Good. It doesn't look like a problem to me to bring the support into Neutron over nova-network. After a brief view the level of effort for the Neutron implementation is not much higher comparing to nova-network. Roman Bogorodskiy ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
On Tuesday, October 21, 2014, Roman Bogorodskiy rbogorods...@mirantis.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Roman Bogorodskiy rbogorods...@mirantis.com javascript:; wrote: [snip] 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 [snip] 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. I have no problem with supporting FreeBSD as a hypervisor operating system, especially if there is a solid team on the FreeBSD side that will commit to maintaining the changes required and adding the necessary CI (especially ensuring that when it breaks it gets fixed). However, I see Neutron support as a firm requirement. We've spent a large amount of time getting closer and closer to deprecating nova-network. Despite opening it up for limited development again, I don't think we should be making the transition plan harder by introducing new features that don't work with Neutron. Michael -- Rackspace Australia ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:39:40AM +1100, Michael Still wrote: On Tuesday, October 21, 2014, Roman Bogorodskiy rbogorods...@mirantis.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Roman Bogorodskiy rbogorods...@mirantis.com javascript:; wrote: [snip] 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 [snip] 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. I have no problem with supporting FreeBSD as a hypervisor operating system, especially if there is a solid team on the FreeBSD side that will commit to maintaining the changes required and adding the necessary CI (especially ensuring that when it breaks it gets fixed). However, I see Neutron support as a firm requirement. We've spent a large amount of time getting closer and closer to deprecating nova-network. Despite opening it up for limited development again, I don't think we should be making the transition plan harder by introducing new features that don't work with Neutron. As far as the Nova side is concerned, any code we add for FreeBSD in the libvirt driver should just work with Neutron and its linuxbridge plugin, since there's nothing new/special about FreeBSD network config in the libvirt XML. Any work is on the Neutron project side to remove any Linux-isms in the Neutron linuxbridge plugin (and any others that the FreeBSD team wish to support) code. So that would obviously require a spec to be submitted to Neutron for any porting effort wrt FreeBSD. As long as the Neutron team are willing to accept portability work to FreeBSD, I don't think we need to block the Nova work on that. We can let then proceeed in parallel, and we simply don't mark Nova FreeBSD as an officially supported driver until both pieces of work are complete Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote: On Tuesday, October 21, 2014, Roman Bogorodskiy rbogorods...@mirantis.com wrote: 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: [snip] 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 [snip] 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. I have no problem with supporting FreeBSD as a hypervisor operating system, especially if there is a solid team on the FreeBSD side that will commit to maintaining the changes required and adding the necessary CI (especially ensuring that when it breaks it gets fixed). However, I see Neutron support as a firm requirement. We've spent a large amount of time getting closer and closer to deprecating nova-network. Despite opening it up for limited development again, I don't think we should be making the transition plan harder by introducing new features that don't work with Neutron. +1000 During Juno we closed a huge amount of the gap, I agree with Michael's sentiment above. Thanks, Kyle Michael -- Rackspace Australia ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
On 10/27/2014 06:39 AM, Michael Still wrote: On Tuesday, October 21, 2014, Roman Bogorodskiy rbogorods...@mirantis.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Roman Bogorodskiy rbogorods...@mirantis.com javascript:; wrote: [snip] 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 [snip] 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. I have no problem with supporting FreeBSD as a hypervisor operating system, especially if there is a solid team on the FreeBSD side that will commit to maintaining the changes required and adding the necessary CI (especially ensuring that when it breaks it gets fixed). I believe that the CI related things that would be needed would be: - solid devstack support - someone willing to step up and make sure that nodepool can provide freebsd images like ianw recently did with centos However, I see Neutron support as a firm requirement. We've spent a large amount of time getting closer and closer to deprecating nova-network. Despite opening it up for limited development again, I don't think we should be making the transition plan harder by introducing new features that don't work with Neutron. I agree with Mikal on this. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
On 10/27/14 9:35 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: snip I have no problem with supporting FreeBSD as a hypervisor operating system, especially if there is a solid team on the FreeBSD side that will commit to maintaining the changes required and adding the necessary CI (especially ensuring that when it breaks it gets fixed). I believe that the CI related things that would be needed would be: - solid devstack support I do not want to hijack this thread with Solaris specific questions, but this point is a major sticking point for us too. To my knowledge, modifying devstack for anything not RHEL/Ubuntu is out of the question (they're not interested in supporting other OSes). We desperately WANT to push our Solaris driver upstream and we're in the process of getting our CI infrastructure in place to do so, but devstack has been out of the question so far. If devstack itself (not CI, but devstack) is a hard requirement for integration we need to probably start up a different thread on what the best way for other OSes like FreeBSD and Solaris to work around this issue. What should we be looking at? A compatible devstack clone that configures Solaris as a single-host development OpenStack rig? -Drew ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
On 10/27/2014 08:51 AM, Drew Fisher wrote: If devstack itself (not CI, but devstack) is a hard requirement for integration we need to probably start up a different thread on what the best way for other OSes like FreeBSD and Solaris to work around this issue. What should we be looking at? A compatible devstack clone that configures Solaris as a single-host development OpenStack rig? I doubt devstack itself is a hard requirement for CI since Windows/Hyper-V testing is done without devstack. I think what mordred meant was that you need to provide a way like devstack for Infra team to test things. To put the thread back in topic, I would assume that the *BSD folks and Oracle/Solaris would have good amount of overlap in this area. How about you team up to either provide good patches to devstack to support the non-linux options (if this is suitable) or develop a new tool similar in scope to devstack for all BSD-family? Maybe that would be good for OS X, too :) Chat in Paris? /stef -- Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
On 10/27/14, 5:57 PM, Stefano Maffulli wrote: On 10/27/2014 08:51 AM, Drew Fisher wrote: If devstack itself (not CI, but devstack) is a hard requirement for integration we need to probably start up a different thread on what the best way for other OSes like FreeBSD and Solaris to work around this issue. What should we be looking at? A compatible devstack clone that configures Solaris as a single-host development OpenStack rig? I doubt devstack itself is a hard requirement for CI since Windows/Hyper-V testing is done without devstack. I think what mordred meant was that you need to provide a way like devstack for Infra team to test things. Sounds good. To put the thread back in topic, I would assume that the *BSD folks and Oracle/Solaris would have good amount of overlap in this area. How about you team up to either provide good patches to devstack to support the non-linux options (if this is suitable) or develop a new tool similar in scope to devstack for all BSD-family? Maybe that would be good for OS X, too :) Chat in Paris? I would love to. Please ping me when you get a moment. -Drew ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
I do not want to hijack this thread with Solaris specific questions, but this point is a major sticking point for us too. To my knowledge, modifying devstack for anything not RHEL/Ubuntu is out of the question (they're not interested in supporting other OSes). I think if the question is does devstack want a review that adds the bash equivalent of #ifdef SOLARIS over everything and happened to sort-of work for someone once, with no CI and a guarantee of instantaneous bit-rot the answer is predictable. If the question is more does devstack want cleaner abstractions between platform and deployment backed up by CI and active involvement I can not see that would be a bad thing. For mine, integrating with CI would be the *first* step. Until infrastructure was ready and able to run the devstack-gate scripts on Solaris/FreeBSD/... nodes and devstack had a non-voting job I personally would be very negative about merging changes for support. Frankly I'm not going to be building and maintaining my own FreeBSD/Solaris systems and hand-testing patches for them, so seeing something happening in CI is the only way I could be sure any proposed changes actually work before I spend time reviewing them. Even if devstack is not the right vehicle, integrating these platforms to the point that git review can run some sort of test -- anything really -- is going to be much more compelling for someone to +2 -i ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
Roman Bogorodskiy wrote: 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: ping? Roman Bogorodskiy pgpz_SKT6P9Gy.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
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 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 09:04:20PM +0400, Roman Bogorodskiy 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. Agreed, I'd avoid the temptation to try to do everything at once. Taking an iterative approach of attacking small chunks of work at a time is much more practical. So by targetting libvirt+qemu you are able to focus on just identifying the Linux specific bits of the existing libvirt+qemu support. Once complete, then you can focus on the separate task of porting to the libvirt+bhyve driver. 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) Yep, this is biggest piece of Linux specific code in Nova codepaths for VM startup at least. So makes sense to deal with this. * nova.virt.disk.mount needs to be extended to support FreeBSD's mdconfig(8) in a similar way to Linux's losetup Broken file injection isn't a show-stopper for booting VMs but is obviously nice to have and shouldn't be too difficult as we already have a decent abstraction layer here. - 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/ Glance Keystone are obviously core things to get working in order to be able to boot a VM. - 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. I wouldn't worry about doing anything in Cinder until you have the rest of Nova almost fully functional on FreeBSD. There are bound to be a number of other things that we can't think of right now that will appear as you do the work get to test more and more functional areas. I wouldn't bother trying to imagine what these are right now nor create specs for them. Instead I'd very much recommend taking an iterative approach to specs + bugs. ie when you come across new problems wrt porting, just file new specs (for big problems needing refactoring) or bugs (for minor problems easily fixed) to deal with the issues as you see fit at the time. IOW I'd just encourage you to jump right into the networking refactor work. That mess badly needs cleaning up even if we don't do FreeBSD work, so is a very worthwhile thing to work on for Kilo regardless. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD host support
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. 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. 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 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
