[rdo-dev] [ppc64le] TripleO Container Build Job Questions

Michael Turek mjturek at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Fri Jun 22 00:24:00 UTC 2018

Hey Alan!

Responses in line, but just to reiterate the main question:

Considering that we need to use duffy, which is preferred?:

1) create new jobs in ci.centos.org (rdo-infra/ci-config) to build 
ppc64le containers
         - con is that this is not where the other container build jobs live
2) create new jobs in review.rdoproject.org 
         - con is that this would use duffy vms, which we believe is 
unique to the jobs defined here

On 6/21/18 7:27 PM, Alan Pevec wrote:
>> We think it'd be a lot easier to pull a couple builders in on the RDO end of
> If by "RDO" you mean in RDO Cloud, there are two answers:ai
We're more referring to the jobs defined for 
review.rdoproject.org/jenkins (where we believe all the container build 
jobs are). The couple of builders we're referring to are 
'weirdo-get-node' and 'weirdo-release-node' which manage ppc64le nodes 
from duffy.
> 1) adding a multiarch computes was not included into design, there's
> separate ops team managing RDO Cloud which we would need to consult
> and get estimates, I'd expect this to be
If we could somehow get the hardware would this be possible? Either way, 
this would more than likely take some time. Our best bet still seems to 
be leveraging the existing ppc64le vms available from Duffy
> 2) we actually do not need to add physical nodes, you just need to
> provide publicly available openstack cloud account which we could add
> as a separate nodepool provider. Is that an option?
We unfortunately do not have a publicly available openstack cloud. This 
may be possible at some point in the future, but right now we just don't 
have the cycles.
>> things rather than stand up a container job over on centos ci, but for the
>> most part we're just looking for direction, because we've heard seemingly
>> conflicting information from either side.
> What is the conflicting info and why is standing up a container job on
> ci.centos.org a problem?
As far as we know, the container build jobs for x86 exist exclusively in 
review.rdoproject.org/jenkins so spinning up the job would be a little 
more work. We'd need to define a containers build job similar to the x86 
one, but in a different place, so we'd probably wind up duplicating some 
configs from rdo-infra/review.rdoproject.org-config into 
rdo-infra/ci-config. Not necessarily a problem, we just want to make 
sure we're doing something the community would approve of. Conflicting 
info is my fault, as I was originally interpreting the conversations as 
jobs belonging in review.rdoproject.org/jenkins but later on hearing 
that we they may belong in ci.centos.org instead.
> As it was pointed out, job is already defined there, you just need to
> assign it to ppc64e duffy nodes.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but the container build jobs are defined on 
review.rdoproject.org and not ci.centos.org.
> Cheers,
> Alan
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at lists.rdoproject.org
> http://lists.rdoproject.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
> To unsubscribe: dev-unsubscribe at lists.rdoproject.org

Sorry if we're misunderstanding anything!

Mike Turek <mjturek on freenode>

More information about the dev mailing list