search

openshift-metal3 / terraform-provider-ironic

Terraform provider for Ironic
Apache License 2.0
24 stars 25 forks source link

Support RAID and BIOS configuration for masters #53

Closed hs0210 closed 2 years ago

hs0210 commented 3 years ago

This PR adds corresponding processing to convert RAID and BIOS configuration into clean steps to make baremetal IPI deployments support RAID and BIOS configuration for master nodes.

Based on:

hardys commented 3 years ago

@dtantsur @zaneb PTAL - my impression here is that it would be better to avoid the large vendor dependency on BMO - it also couples the terraform provider to some internal BMO APIs.

Would it perhaps be better to refactor the needed code into a new package/module, or would it be better to just reimplement a minimal copy of the same logic here?

zaneb commented 3 years ago

I can definitely see some value in making the bmc package its own go module. This would be helpful for the webhook as well.

If the ironic RAID support is going to be shared then I agree it at least belongs in its own package, and maybe its own go module to minimise dependencies.

@ardaguclu what do you think?

ardaguclu commented 3 years ago

When I looked at the new dependencies come along with this change;

baremetalhost "github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/apis/metal3.io/v1alpha1"
"github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/pkg/bmc"
"github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/pkg/provisioner/ironic"

baremetalhost "github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/apis/metal3.io/v1alpha1" has it's own go module already.

I totally agree with you, these two packages can be in a separate go module. I think, contextually it also serves as ironic wrapper.

"github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/pkg/bmc"
"github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/pkg/provisioner/ironic"
dtantsur commented 3 years ago

Honestly, I've been long dreaming of creating something like ironic-go, which would be a more or less metal3-agnostic ironic module. Time to do it?

UPD: I'm definitely against copy-pasting logic, even as a temporary measure.

ardaguclu commented 3 years ago

Honestly, I've been long dreaming of creating something like ironic-go, which would be a more or less metal3-agnostic ironic module. Time to do it?

You know better than me how much BMO specific logic spread in these packages. But if it is possible, it sounds like a good idea.

hardys commented 3 years ago

Honestly, I've been long dreaming of creating something like ironic-go, which would be a more or less metal3-agnostic ironic module. Time to do it?

@dtantsur how would this differ from the ironic code that exists in gophercloud? I get that gophercloud is mostly a pretty minimal go binding to the API, but I'm wondering if such metal3-agnostic logic could live there, and if not - how do we reason about what goes into ironic-go vs gophercloud?

I've found the gophercloud maintainer to be pretty responsive, is it worth having some discussion before creating a net-new module/repo?

ardaguclu commented 3 years ago

I checked how viable to decouple bmc and ironic packages into new go module or repository;

As far as I can see in this PR, https://github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/tree/master/pkg/provisioner/ironic is also used, that means bmc and ironic should be decoupled from main go module.

hase1128 commented 3 years ago

My current concerns are: 1: Since it takes a lot of time to create ironic-go, is it possible to target only the following 2 packages that depend on this PR first?

   "github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/pkg/bmc"
   "github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/pkg/provisioner/ironic"

2: In this case, how do we reason about what goes into ironic-go vs gophercloud? (This is @hardys 's queston)

zaneb commented 3 years ago

Is there some reason that the size of the (unused) dependencies is actually an issue? It's unlikely to cause conflicts with anything else in this module.

I think the issue is reusing internal APIs. IMHO we should revert metal3-io/baremetal-operator#989 and do a more minimal change like moving the RAID code to a separate package.

hs0210 commented 2 years ago

I have updated this PR based on the #1017. PTAL.

ardaguclu commented 2 years ago

LGTM, but maybe someone also might want to look at raid changes.

hase1128 commented 2 years ago

/retest

hs0210 commented 2 years ago

/retest

hardys commented 2 years ago

The test failure looks real

 github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/pkg/provisioner/ironic/clients

../../../../pkg/mod/github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator@v0.0.0-20211203102512-3572353e42e5/pkg/provisioner/ironic/clients/auth.go:38:18: undefined: os.ReadFile

note: module requires Go 1.16

Looks like we need to bump the go version in the CI environment

hardys commented 2 years ago

This now needs a rebase since the go bump PR landed - thanks for fixing that! :)

hs0210 commented 2 years ago

@hardys Thanks! The CI has passed, PTAL. :)

ardaguclu commented 2 years ago

I think, we can merge this PR and start testing in installer PR.

/lgtm

hs0210 commented 2 years ago

Hi, we are corresponding to https://github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/pull/1063#issuecomment-1034407549 and IMO this will not block this patch's review.

It seems like we ideally need e.g bmc.AccessDetailsFromDriverInfo

IMHO, the information provided by DriverInfo(as well as other methods) is not sufficient to instantiate AccessDetails, unless we modify the existing DriverInfo method.

Considering that the installer has instantiated accessDetails, it might be better to call BuildBIOSSettings directly on the installer side to process the BIOS.

Please continue to review this part. Thanks!

rhjanders commented 2 years ago

/retest

openshift-ci[bot] commented 2 years ago

@rhjanders: Cannot trigger testing until a trusted user reviews the PR and leaves an /ok-to-test message.

In response to [this](https://github.com/openshift-metal3/terraform-provider-ironic/pull/53#issuecomment-1040114206): >/retest Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available [here](https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/pull-requests.md). If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the [kubernetes/test-infra](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/issues/new?title=Prow%20issue:) repository.
rhjanders commented 2 years ago

/ok-to-test

rhjanders commented 2 years ago

/retest

openshift-ci[bot] commented 2 years ago

@rhjanders: Cannot trigger testing until a trusted user reviews the PR and leaves an /ok-to-test message.

In response to [this](https://github.com/openshift-metal3/terraform-provider-ironic/pull/53#issuecomment-1040114944): >/ok-to-test Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available [here](https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/pull-requests.md). If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the [kubernetes/test-infra](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/issues/new?title=Prow%20issue:) repository.
openshift-ci[bot] commented 2 years ago

@rhjanders: Cannot trigger testing until a trusted user reviews the PR and leaves an /ok-to-test message.

In response to [this](https://github.com/openshift-metal3/terraform-provider-ironic/pull/53#issuecomment-1040115090): >/retest Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available [here](https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/pull-requests.md). If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the [kubernetes/test-infra](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/issues/new?title=Prow%20issue:) repository.
rhjanders commented 2 years ago

/ok-to-test

openshift-ci[bot] commented 2 years ago

@rhjanders: Cannot trigger testing until a trusted user reviews the PR and leaves an /ok-to-test message.

In response to [this](https://github.com/openshift-metal3/terraform-provider-ironic/pull/53#issuecomment-1040115723): >/ok-to-test Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available [here](https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/pull-requests.md). If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the [kubernetes/test-infra](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/issues/new?title=Prow%20issue:) repository.
hs0210 commented 2 years ago

When I tried to update the PRs to test the features, the installer fail to compile due to some conflicts caused by different versions of gophercloud in BMO and installer.

BMO has been using gophercloud:v0.22.0; but installer is still using v0.17.0. So I tried to update gophercloud vendored by installer to the latest. After resolving some dependency conflicts, the installer compiled successfully, but got a panic during IPI. I sent issue https://github.com/openshift/installer/issues/5653, PTAL, thanks!

dtantsur commented 2 years ago

/ok-to-test

hs0210 commented 2 years ago

The CI failed by issue https://github.com/openshift-metal3/terraform-provider-ironic/issues/63, and I have sent PR https://github.com/openshift-metal3/terraform-provider-ironic/pull/64 to fix it. PTAL.

hs0210 commented 2 years ago

Then dependencies problem mentioned above has been resolved after https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/5507 and I have closed the issue.

So could we continue the review please? Is my idea here acceptable? PTAL, thanks!

hs0210 commented 2 years ago

@zaneb @hardys @ardaguclu Hi, @dtantsur has helped sent https://github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/pull/1094 to expose func CheckRAIDInterface which should be merged soon, so this PR is not blocked by https://github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/pull/1063 any more. Could we continue the review? Let's move on to the discussion where is the right place to process the BIOS. Thanks very much!

hs0210 commented 2 years ago

Thanks to the merge of https://github.com/metal3-io/baremetal-operator/pull/1094, I have updated this PR accordingly. Everything about this PR is up to date now, please continue to review.

hs0210 commented 2 years ago

@dtantsur About processing the BIOS on installer side, could you help take a look? Can we handle it this way?

dtantsur commented 2 years ago

/approve

I think this is good to go. Thank you!

openshift-ci[bot] commented 2 years ago

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dtantsur

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files: - ~~[OWNERS](https://github.com/openshift-metal3/terraform-provider-ironic/blob/master/OWNERS)~~ [dtantsur] Approvers can indicate their approval by writing `/approve` in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing `/approve cancel` in a comment
ardaguclu commented 2 years ago

/lgtm

ardaguclu commented 2 years ago

/lgtm