Merge "Extra gabbi tests for same_subtree"
This commit is contained in:
Zuul
Gerrit Code Review
commit
541052ad5e
@ -231,6 +231,69 @@ tests:
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_3_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [2, 2]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_4_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [2, 2]
|
||||
|
||||
- name: resourceless with same subtree 2+1+1 VFs
|
||||
GET: /allocation_candidates
|
||||
query_parameters:
|
||||
resources: VCPU:1
|
||||
required_NIC: CUSTOM_HW_NIC_ROOT
|
||||
resources_PORT1: CUSTOM_VF:2
|
||||
required_PORT1: CUSTOM_PHYSNET1
|
||||
resources_PORT2A: CUSTOM_VF:1
|
||||
required_PORT2A: CUSTOM_PHYSNET2
|
||||
resources_PORT2B: CUSTOM_VF:1
|
||||
required_PORT2B: CUSTOM_PHYSNET2
|
||||
same_subtree: _NIC,_PORT1,_PORT2A,_PORT2B
|
||||
group_policy: none
|
||||
response_json_paths:
|
||||
$.allocation_requests.`len`: 9
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["CN2_UUID"]'].resources.VCPU: [1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF1_1_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: 2
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF1_2_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: 2
|
||||
# The four extra candidates still have both PHYSNET1 VFs from the same provider...
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_1_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [2, 2, 2, 2]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_3_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [2, 2, 2, 2]
|
||||
# ...but one PHYSNET2 VF from each of PF2_2 and PF2_4
|
||||
# NOTE(efried): This would be more readable as...
|
||||
# $.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_2_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF.`sorted`: [1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2]
|
||||
# $.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_4_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF.`sorted`: [1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2]
|
||||
# ...but jsonpath pukes with "TypeError: 'DatumInContext' object is not iterable"
|
||||
# And this `len` also blows up:
|
||||
# $.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_2_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF.`len`: 6
|
||||
# $.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_4_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF.`len`: 6
|
||||
# So instead, we use a filter to find all the allocation requests with
|
||||
# one VF -- there should be four of them...
|
||||
$.allocation_requests[?(allocations.'$ENVIRON["PF2_2_UUID"]'.resources.CUSTOM_VF<=1)]..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_2_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [1, 1, 1, 1]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests[?(allocations.'$ENVIRON["PF2_4_UUID"]'.resources.CUSTOM_VF<=1)]..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_4_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [1, 1, 1, 1]
|
||||
# ...and similarly to find all the allocation requests with two VFs --
|
||||
# there should be two of them:
|
||||
$.allocation_requests[?(allocations.'$ENVIRON["PF2_2_UUID"]'.resources.CUSTOM_VF>1)]..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_2_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [2, 2]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests[?(allocations.'$ENVIRON["PF2_4_UUID"]'.resources.CUSTOM_VF>1)]..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_4_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [2, 2]
|
||||
|
||||
- name: resourceless with same subtree 2+1+1 VFs isolate
|
||||
GET: /allocation_candidates
|
||||
query_parameters:
|
||||
resources: VCPU:1
|
||||
required_NIC: CUSTOM_HW_NIC_ROOT
|
||||
resources_PORT1: CUSTOM_VF:2
|
||||
required_PORT1: CUSTOM_PHYSNET1
|
||||
resources_PORT2A: CUSTOM_VF:1
|
||||
required_PORT2A: CUSTOM_PHYSNET2
|
||||
resources_PORT2B: CUSTOM_VF:1
|
||||
required_PORT2B: CUSTOM_PHYSNET2
|
||||
same_subtree: _NIC,_PORT1,_PORT2A,_PORT2B
|
||||
group_policy: isolate
|
||||
response_json_paths:
|
||||
# Delta from above - by isolating, we lose:
|
||||
# - the candidate under nic1 because we can't isolate VFs on NET2 there.
|
||||
# - the four candidates under nic2 involving both PHYSNET2 VFs coming
|
||||
# from the same provider.
|
||||
$.allocation_requests.`len`: 4
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["CN2_UUID"]'].resources.VCPU: [1, 1, 1, 1]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_1_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [2, 2]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_3_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [2, 2]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_2_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [1, 1, 1, 1]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["PF2_4_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_VF: [1, 1, 1, 1]
|
||||
|
||||
- name: resourceless with same subtree same provider
|
||||
GET: /allocation_candidates
|
||||
query_parameters:
|
||||
@ -301,6 +364,24 @@ tests:
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..mappings['_ACCEL1'][0]: /(?:$ENVIRON['FPGA1_0_UUID']|$ENVIRON['FPGA1_1_UUID'])/
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..mappings['_ACCEL2'][0]: /(?:$ENVIRON['FPGA1_0_UUID']|$ENVIRON['FPGA1_1_UUID'])/
|
||||
|
||||
- name: duplicate suffixes are squashed
|
||||
GET: /allocation_candidates
|
||||
query_parameters:
|
||||
required_NUMA: HW_NUMA_ROOT
|
||||
resources_ACCEL1: CUSTOM_FPGA:1
|
||||
resources_ACCEL2: CUSTOM_FPGA:1
|
||||
# This test is identical to the above except for duplicated suffixes here
|
||||
same_subtree: _NUMA,_ACCEL1,_ACCEL2,_NUMA,_ACCEL1
|
||||
group_policy: isolate
|
||||
response_json_paths:
|
||||
$.allocation_requests.`len`: 2
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["FPGA1_0_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_FPGA: [1, 1]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..allocations['$ENVIRON["FPGA1_1_UUID"]'].resources.CUSTOM_FPGA: [1, 1]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..mappings.`len`: [3, 3]
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..mappings['_NUMA'][0]: /(?:$ENVIRON['NUMA1_UUID']|$ENVIRON['NUMA1_UUID'])/
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..mappings['_ACCEL1'][0]: /(?:$ENVIRON['FPGA1_0_UUID']|$ENVIRON['FPGA1_1_UUID'])/
|
||||
$.allocation_requests..mappings['_ACCEL2'][0]: /(?:$ENVIRON['FPGA1_0_UUID']|$ENVIRON['FPGA1_1_UUID'])/
|
||||
|
||||
- name: resourceless with same subtree 2FPGAs forbidden
|
||||
GET: /allocation_candidates
|
||||
query_parameters:
|
||||
@ -311,3 +392,49 @@ tests:
|
||||
group_policy: isolate
|
||||
response_json_paths:
|
||||
$.allocation_requests.`len`: 0
|
||||
|
||||
- name: multiple same_subtree qparams
|
||||
GET: /allocation_candidates
|
||||
query_parameters:
|
||||
required_NUMA: HW_NUMA_ROOT
|
||||
resources_COMPUTE: VCPU:2,MEMORY_MB:512
|
||||
resources_FPGA: CUSTOM_FPGA:1
|
||||
resources_GPU: VGPU:1
|
||||
required_SRIOV: CUSTOM_VNIC_TYPE_DIRECT
|
||||
resources_NET1: NET_BW_EGR_KILOBIT_PER_SEC:100
|
||||
required_NET1: CUSTOM_PHYSNET1
|
||||
resources_NET2: NET_BW_EGR_KILOBIT_PER_SEC:100
|
||||
required_NET2: CUSTOM_PHYSNET2
|
||||
same_subtree:
|
||||
# Compute and accel resources from the same NUMA node
|
||||
- _NUMA,_COMPUTE,_GPU,_FPGA
|
||||
# Bandwidth resources under the same agent
|
||||
- _SRIOV,_NET1,_NET2
|
||||
group_policy: none
|
||||
response_json_paths:
|
||||
# There's only one way this shakes out
|
||||
$.allocation_requests.`len`: 1
|
||||
$.allocation_requests[0].allocations['$ENVIRON['NUMA0_UUID']']:
|
||||
resources:
|
||||
VCPU: 2
|
||||
MEMORY_MB: 512
|
||||
$.allocation_requests[0].allocations['$ENVIRON['FPGA0_UUID']']:
|
||||
resources:
|
||||
CUSTOM_FPGA: 1
|
||||
$.allocation_requests[0].allocations['$ENVIRON['PGPU0_UUID']']:
|
||||
resources:
|
||||
VGPU: 1
|
||||
$.allocation_requests[0].allocations['$ENVIRON['ESN1_UUID']']:
|
||||
resources:
|
||||
NET_BW_EGR_KILOBIT_PER_SEC: 100
|
||||
$.allocation_requests[0].allocations['$ENVIRON['ESN2_UUID']']:
|
||||
resources:
|
||||
NET_BW_EGR_KILOBIT_PER_SEC: 100
|
||||
$.allocation_requests[0].mappings:
|
||||
_NUMA: ["$ENVIRON['NUMA0_UUID']"]
|
||||
_COMPUTE: ["$ENVIRON['NUMA0_UUID']"]
|
||||
_FPGA: ["$ENVIRON['FPGA0_UUID']"]
|
||||
_GPU: ["$ENVIRON['PGPU0_UUID']"]
|
||||
_SRIOV: ["$ENVIRON['SRIOV_AGENT_UUID']"]
|
||||
_NET1: ["$ENVIRON['ESN1_UUID']"]
|
||||
_NET2: ["$ENVIRON['ESN2_UUID']"]
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user