Skip to content
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

Add support for cpumanager LLC alignment option #1724

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ffromani
Copy link

@ffromani ffromani commented Dec 4, 2024

Enhancement to support the cpu LLC alignment feature introduced as alpha in kubernetes 1.32.

In this enhancement we focus on how to unpack cpumanager policy option, as the rest of the process seems straightforward.

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 4, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign patrickdillon for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@ffromani ffromani force-pushed the cpumanager-alpha-options-llc branch 2 times, most recently from 8403b26 to b7448a1 Compare December 4, 2024 10:54
ffromani added a commit to ffromani/openshift-api that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2024
add feature gate to enable selected users to consume
cpumanager policy options of alfpha maturtiy.
Needs to be merged alongside openshift/kubernetes#2136
which enables per-option granularity

for more details: openshift/enhancements#1724

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
@ffromani
Copy link
Author

ffromani commented Dec 4, 2024

xref: openshift/api#2115
xref: openshift/kubernetes#2136

@haircommander
Copy link
Member

it's not clear to me which option you prefer / is the current recommendation. I would recommend choosing one and then leaving the others as alternatives. Personally, I think going strict enablement file route may be cleanest because then user doesn't need to attempt to enable an alpha feature gate, plus they don't get the full bundle of alpha features but just the one we're specifically allowing. Alternatively, we could introduce an openshift specific feature gate that enables which then would have both API visibility but a smaller surface of code changes.

The risks are thus minimized; users may forget to set the enablement file.
The mitigation is to have clear documentation about the requisite to set the feature to on

#### 3: Just the per-option extra enablement file
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should go with this option.

In this enhancement we focus on how to unpack
cpumanager policy option, as the rest of the process
seems straightforward.

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
@ffromani ffromani force-pushed the cpumanager-alpha-options-llc branch from b7448a1 to 47e21fc Compare December 6, 2024 09:46
@ffromani
Copy link
Author

ffromani commented Dec 6, 2024

updated to address all comments, so we now have a track record

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 6, 2024

@ffromani: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants