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

proposal: support pod customizing numa policy #1910

Conversation

KunWuLuan
Copy link
Contributor

Ⅰ. Describe what this PR does

Introduce new api for pod level numa topology policy. With the new api, users can specify numa topology policy for each
pod, so that pods that are more sensitive to latency can decide how they need to be orchestrated, rather than being passively
scheduled according to the numa topology policy on the node.

Ⅱ. Does this pull request fix one issue?

Ⅲ. Describe how to verify it

Ⅳ. Special notes for reviews

V. Checklist

  • I have written necessary docs and comments
  • I have added necessary unit tests and integration tests
  • All checks passed in make test

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 21, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 67.47%. Comparing base (da6a05c) to head (23f7ce6).
Report is 44 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1910      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   67.23%   67.47%   +0.24%     
==========================================
  Files         407      420      +13     
  Lines       45644    46858    +1214     
==========================================
+ Hits        30687    31617     +930     
- Misses      12741    12938     +197     
- Partials     2216     2303      +87     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 67.47% <ø> (+0.24%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@eahydra eahydra changed the title [Proposal] support numa policy on pod proposal: support pod customizing numa policy Feb 27, 2024
@hormes
Copy link
Member

hormes commented Feb 28, 2024

BTW, please fix DCO by git commit -s.

Signed-off-by: KunWuLuan <kunwuluan@gmail.com>
@KunWuLuan KunWuLuan force-pushed the proposal/support-numa-policy-on-pod branch from 90b91d5 to 5f882f4 Compare February 28, 2024 08:46
Signed-off-by: KunWuLuan <kunwuluan@gmail.com>
@hormes
Copy link
Member

hormes commented Mar 5, 2024

/lgtm

@koordinator-bot koordinator-bot bot removed the lgtm label Mar 5, 2024
Signed-off-by: KunWuLuan <kunwuluan@gmail.com>
@KunWuLuan KunWuLuan force-pushed the proposal/support-numa-policy-on-pod branch from ab1975c to 23f7ce6 Compare March 5, 2024 09:35
@eahydra
Copy link
Member

eahydra commented Mar 6, 2024

/lgtm

@KunWuLuan
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hormes Hi, is there any questions for this proposal? If not we can start to implement the new feature. Please take a look if you have time, thanks.

@hormes
Copy link
Member

hormes commented Mar 12, 2024

@hormes Hi, is there any questions for this proposal? If not we can start to implement the new feature. Please take a look if you have time, thanks.

LGTM.
/approve

@koordinator-bot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: hormes

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:

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

@koordinator-bot koordinator-bot bot merged commit c64c01e into koordinator-sh:main Mar 12, 2024
19 of 20 checks passed
@KunWuLuan KunWuLuan deleted the proposal/support-numa-policy-on-pod branch March 12, 2024 07:15
ls-2018 pushed a commit to ls-2018/koordinator that referenced this pull request Mar 25, 2024
Signed-off-by: KunWuLuan <kunwuluan@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants