On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 12:35 PM Giulio Casella <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello everybody, > using ovirt node many of the drivers to access storage are not in the > kernel drivers (anymore). > For example I have a bunch of (old) hypervisors (50+), with infiniband > nics, used to access storage. For all those hypervisors I abandoned > ovirt node, in favor of a base CentOS stream distro, with ovirt repo and > using kernel-plus repo (conatining all the needed stuff). > Obviously this is not a step I liked, I definitely prefer ovirt node. > > Now my proposal: why don't include kernel-plus in ovirt-node, instead of > traditional kernel? > > I know this would be a big change, and maybe @Sandro and all RH guys > (they have a more general perspective) can see some drawback I don't, > but... hey, I just tried! :-)
That's definitely an option - but I am not sure we want to _replace_ node with this. Perhaps as an additional alternative. I do not follow closely CentOS Stream development and Plus (I know there are/were discussions about a kernel SIG etc., not sure about current status), and wonder what you might want such a node-kernel-plus image to look like over time. If you have a well-thought-out detailed proposal, I suggest to simply file an RFE bug. What you can do right now, if all you need is the driver, and already have it, is make node use your driver. That's not as simple as with plain CentOS, but doable - see this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834298 Best regards, -- Didi _______________________________________________ Users mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html oVirt Code of Conduct: https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/ List Archives: https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/M7AWSJ7XPZR6IQQ43XG3S6GYVMMYFOEQ/
