-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 49
[PERFSCALE-3943] LACP bonding for perf/scale lab (2) #706
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Jose Castillo Lema <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jose Castillo Lema <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jose Castillo Lema <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jose Castillo Lema <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jose Castillo Lema <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jose Castillo Lema <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jose Castillo Lema <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jose Castillo Lema <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jose Castillo Lema <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jose Castillo Lema <[email protected]>
Ongoing testing in: openshift/release#69765
|
Signed-off-by: Jose Castillo Lema <[email protected]>
And bonding working with MNO as well:
|
/assign @akrzos |
@akrzos this is ready for review! Thanks |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think there is a slight mis-understanding to the indexes of mac addresses provided by the scale lab and the nic names saved in hw_nic_name
that we should address.
loop: | ||
- "{{ bastion_bond0_interface1 }}" | ||
- "{{ bastion_bond0_interface2 }}" | ||
ignore_errors: true |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Anytime we put an ignore_errors
on a task, we should try to include a comment as to why it exists. I realize I had missed this the first time. Could you add a short one line comment similar to something like this. Ideally we don't end up ignoring an error that we want to know about, but I do understand in some situations ignore_errors
becomes the best option.
bond0_port1: 1 | ||
bond0_port2: 2 | ||
# Default behavior uses interfaces at indices 0 and 1 from hw_nic_name mapping | ||
bond0_port1: 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm a little confused at choosing "index" 0 since that would refer to the public nic in hw_nic_name
Is that intentional?
- name: MNO - Set controlplane0 bond mac addresses | ||
set_fact: | ||
controlplane0_bond0_macs: "{{ (controlplane0_foreman_data.json.interfaces | selectattr('name', 'eq', bond0_interface1) | first).mac }},{{ (controlplane0_foreman_data.json.interfaces | selectattr('name', 'eq', bond0_interface2) | first).mac }}" | ||
controlplane0_bond0_macs: "{{ ocpinventory.json.nodes[1].mac[bond0_port1|int] }},{{ ocpinventory.json.nodes[1].mac[bond0_port2|int] }}" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For mac addresses, the scale lab does not include the public nic in the list of mac addresses so this is likely the reason you may have adjusted bond0_port1
and bond0_port2
back one index. The issue here is the scale lab index and hw_nic_name
do not match for mac and nic names. This was intentional at the time hw_nic_name
because it was solely for managing what nic name would be choosen for hypervisors.
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
No description provided.