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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

OCPBUGS-46584: Adjust Workload Hints test cases based on Intel or AMD #1258

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 6, 2025
Merged

OCPBUGS-46584: Adjust Workload Hints test cases based on Intel or AMD #1258

merged 5 commits into from
Jan 6, 2025

Conversation

mrniranjan
Copy link
Contributor

This PR adds utility functions to get Cpu Vendor (intel or AMD) in case of x86_64.
Also Adjust Workload Hints test cases where kernel Args are adjusted based on Intel or AMD.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from Tal-or and yanirq December 18, 2024 16:05
@mrniranjan mrniranjan changed the title Adjust Workload Hints test cases based on Intel or AMD OCPBUGS-46584: Adjust Workload Hints test cases based on Intel or AMD Dec 18, 2024
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Dec 18, 2024
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@mrniranjan: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-46584, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target version (4.19.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.19.0)
  • bug is in the state New, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @mrniranjan

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

This PR adds utility functions to get Cpu Vendor (intel or AMD) in case of x86_64.
Also Adjust Workload Hints test cases where kernel Args are adjusted based on Intel or AMD.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Dec 18, 2024
@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 18, 2024

@openshift-ci-robot: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: mrniranjan.

Note that only openshift members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.

In response to this:

@mrniranjan: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-46584, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target version (4.19.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.19.0)
  • bug is in the state New, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @mrniranjan

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

This PR adds utility functions to get Cpu Vendor (intel or AMD) in case of x86_64.
Also Adjust Workload Hints test cases where kernel Args are adjusted based on Intel or AMD.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

MarSik
MarSik reviewed Dec 18, 2024
View reviewed changes
test/e2e/performanceprofile/functests/8_performance_workloadhints/workloadhints.go Outdated
if isIntel {
Expect(cmdline).To(ContainSubstring("intel_pstate=passive"))
Expect(cmdline).ToNot(ContainSubstring("intel_pstate=active"))
} else {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Would isAMD be more descriptive with an else that throws an error? Just in case we get ARM machines in the future?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ack, i will add it

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

fixed in the latest commit

@mrniranjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest-required

@mrniranjan mrniranjan force-pushed the check_cpu_vendor branch 2 times, most recently from 50ded99 to 9d47c77 Compare December 19, 2024 02:47
@mrniranjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest-required

Niranjan M.R added 3 commits December 19, 2024 12:24
Add utility function to check cpu vendor
c557d47 
We use lscpu output and check Vendor ID to determine
if the system is AMD or Intel.

Signed-off-by: Niranjan M.R <[email protected]>
Workload Hints E2E: Modify kernel args based on Vendor
07e1005 
Adjust Workload Hints E2E test cases to verify kernel
parameters depending on the Vendor in the case of x86_64
where kernel args are changed based on Intel or AMD.

Signed-off-by: Niranjan M.R <[email protected]>
Add condition to check if vendor is AMD
b8cf664 
Signed-off-by: Niranjan M.R <[email protected]>
MarSik
MarSik approved these changes Dec 20, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@MarSik MarSik left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Dec 20, 2024
@yanirq
Copy link
Contributor

yanirq commented Dec 21, 2024

/label acknowledge-critical-fixes-only

test only change

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the acknowledge-critical-fixes-only Indicates if the issuer of the label is OK with the policy. label Dec 21, 2024
@mrniranjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

@yanirq sorry, i am adding a hold due to a bug in my patch

@mrniranjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

/hold

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Dec 21, 2024
Remove duplicate intel related kernel args
95bd2cc 
remove duplicate intel_pstate=passive from kernelParameters
string slice as it's already added if system is intel

Signed-off-by: Niranjan M.R <[email protected]>
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 21, 2024
@mrniranjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Dec 21, 2024
@mrniranjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest-required

swatisehgal
swatisehgal approved these changes Jan 6, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@swatisehgal swatisehgal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 6, 2025
@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 6, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: MarSik, mrniranjan, swatisehgal

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

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 7428d36 and 2 for PR HEAD 36b55eb in total

@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 6, 2025

@mrniranjan: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit a3a7d19 into openshift:master Jan 6, 2025
17 checks passed
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@mrniranjan: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-46584: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Jira Issue OCPBUGS-46584 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

This PR adds utility functions to get Cpu Vendor (intel or AMD) in case of x86_64.
Also Adjust Workload Hints test cases where kernel Args are adjusted based on Intel or AMD.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

[ART PR BUILD NOTIFIER]

Distgit: cluster-node-tuning-operator
This PR has been included in build cluster-node-tuning-operator-container-v4.19.0-202501061706.p0.ga3a7d19.assembly.stream.el9.
All builds following this will include this PR.

@mrniranjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cherry-pick release-4.18

@openshift-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

@mrniranjan: new pull request created: #1274

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-4.18

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@openshift-cherrypick-robot openshift-cherrypick-robot mentioned this pull request Jan 7, 2025
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@swatisehgal swatisehgal swatisehgal approved these changes

@MarSik MarSik MarSik approved these changes

@Tal-or Tal-or Awaiting requested review from Tal-or

@yanirq yanirq Awaiting requested review from yanirq

Assignees

@MarSik MarSik

@swatisehgal swatisehgal

Labels
acknowledge-critical-fixes-only Indicates if the issuer of the label is OK with the policy. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@mrniranjan @openshift-ci-robot @yanirq @openshift-bot @openshift-cherrypick-robot @MarSik @swatisehgal