Open Stack

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ernst, Eric
> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 6:40 AM
> To: kata-dev at lists.katacontainers.io; Zhong, Yang <yang.zhong at intel.com>;
> Mahalingam, Ganesh <ganesh.mahalingam at intel.com>
> Subject: Virtio-fs support for Kata - updates needed
> 
> Hey virty-container-wizards,
> 
> 
> 
> I wanted to continue dialogue around virtio-fs support for Kata.  We are
> still hoping to get this into 1.7.  I wanted to see if there were any
> updates, and make sure the tasks/gaps are well understood, as we are hoping
> to have features in for 1.7 by *EOW next week*.
> 
> 
> 
> See the following project for tracking this work:
> https://github.com/orgs/kata-containers/projects/16
> <https://github.com/orgs/kata-containers/projects/16>
> 
> 
> 
> 1.	NEMU support for virtio-fs: see https://github.com/kata-
> containers/packaging/issues/401 <https://github.com/kata-
> containers/packaging/issues/401>
> 
> 	a.	AFAIU, 4.0 rebase is completed (nice work ya’l!), and we have
> an initial hypervisor binary available for basic testing
> 	b.	Have we gone through and done metrics run off of this?
> 	c.	How are we packaging NEMU today (at the very least should be
> part of static now)?
> 
> 
> 
> 2.	Virtio-fs design docs: https://github.com/kata-
> containers/documentation/issues/419 <https://github.com/kata-
> containers/documentation/issues/419>
> 
> 	a.	Who owns this? Can folks from RedHat help here?  @Stefan?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.	Kernel:
> 
> 	a.	We are still working to migrate to 5.0.  This is ongoing for a
> while and I’m afraid it’s one of the bigger risks at this point for 1.7
> release.  Once config fragments, [1],  and the bump, [2] are merged, who is
> owning addition of virtio-fs patches, [3]?
> 	b.	Ganesh: I assume you are working through the kernel upgrade
> and will do the addition of the virtio-fs kernel patches (can we put your
> name on the issue)? I believe there were some test gaps indentified between
> snaps and fragments. Can you please call them out here so we can get this
> fixed with higher priority/haste?

Apologies for not getting back on this earlier but i have been trying to sort things out. This is the latest update and possibly the right order in which things will land.

The current virtio-fs release (v0.2)[1] is based off v4.19.0. There is a new branch that Vivek from RH is maintaining that is based off 5.1-rc5. Until that is made as a release off a long-term kernel release, I think it would be good to use one that is based off a long-term/stable release. I tried rebasing v0.2 release to 4.19.28 kernel release that is in use by Kata at this point and i was unable to get it working. With some more testing we have identified v4.19.15 as the kernel release from which virtio-fs is broken. I have reached out to Stefan and will work with Vivek, Stefan and the RH team to get a working release.

With the current state, I believe this would be a good way to move forward.

1. Work with RH team to get a virtio-fs release off v4.19.28 which can be merged into the tree.
2. Config fragments patch is being tested and worked now by Graham and a few of us. That will land as soon as it is ready.

Between 1 & 2, we can land them as and when they are ready. There should be little to no overlap between the two.

3. Have a virtio-fs release off 5.x long-term/stable release.
4. Move kata kernel to 5.x along with virtio-fs update.

> 
> 
> 
> 4.	Testing:  see https://github.com/kata-containers/ci/issues/137
> <https://github.com/kata-containers/ci/issues/137>
> 
> 	a.	Who is an appropriate owner here?

Salvador and I are working through this. You can list Salvador or both of us as contacts for this.
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to volun-tell people if necessary for some of the open issues in the
> GitHub project ☺
> 
> 
> 
> Thx,
> 
> Eric
> 
>