[OE-core] meta-cloud layer

[Raymond Danks]

Thanks for looping me in here David. The initial goal for the meta-xen 
layer was in fact to encompass Xen Cloud Platform.  As such, the intent 
was to contain both hypervisor and user-space applications.  Indeed, the 
xen distribution itself includes xm/libxl; hypervisor abstraction would 
be somewhat tedious in my opinion.

The layer just received commits for expanding the libvirt build to 
support qemu.  The commonalities and shared packaged between xen, qemu, 
and kvm implementations are such that I would also agree that meta-xen 
should be expanded/renamed to encompass all virtualization types; I also 
support the move to meta-virtualization.

As far as a meta-cloud layer is concerned, I'm not sure I am 
knowledgeable enough in this area to weigh in.  I'm currently 
researching a filesystem implementation for OpenStack and have stumbled 
across Ceph/RBD and Gluster modules that look promising. On top of this, 
XCP is documented to include support for VastSky and can be integrated 
with DRBD.  And, the storage and hypervisor are only two pieces of the 
puzzle for a cloud implementation!

I think I would encourage you to also include OpenStack in a 
meta-virtualization layer until it has matured to the point where 
abstraction is more warranted.  Since you've already created a presence 
at github, would it be possible to rename your layer to 
meta-virtualization and absorb the entire meta-xen layer?  I can push 
any changes for Xen/XCP here, it sounds like it is a central place for 
libvirt and could also contain Bruce's kernel modifications.

Alternatively, I can create a meta-virtualization project.  In any case, 
those on the To and CC list should receive access to this layer as a 
starting point.

Just my two cents.  :)

Ray

On 11/29/2012 01:41 AM, David Nyström wrote:
> Adding Ray Danks to CC.
>
> Ray, how do you want to go forward with the meta-xen layer ?
>
> From my perspective, having the actual hypervisor technology abstracted
> from the userspace virtualization stuff is preferable. So a user could 
> pick-and-place hypervisor layer/s depending on needs. (And good for 
> use-case benchmarks as well).
>
> libvirt package and others are smart enough to autodetect underlying 
> hypervisor tech capabilities, and should work out-of-the-box from that 
> aspect.
>
> As to where all this will finally end up, anything goes as far as I'm 
> concerned. I'll continue working in meta-cloud for now, until 
> consensus is reached on the final whereabouts for the virtualization 
> specific recipes.
>
> If anyone want to join me on github, send me an email.
>
> Best Regards,
> David
>
>
> On 11/28/2012 06:25 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Richard Purdie <
>> richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 17:10 +0100, David Nyström wrote:
>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I'm working on getting a minimal Yocto/oe-core based OpenStack setup
>>>> running with the meta-cloud layer, with bits and pieces "borrowed" 
>>>> from
>>>> the meta-xen layer.
>>>
>>> Great news!
>>>
>>> It might be worth growing meta-xen into a meta-virtualisation layer
>>> since kvm, openstack and xen all seem to be sharing a lot of pieces.
>>> This depends on the maintainers but it would seem to be logical rather
>>> than many small interdependent layers.
>>>
>>
>> FWIW. I'd like to see this as well, and can contribute/help where 
>> possible.
>> I
>> was considering a meta-ovs (Open Virtualization Solutions), but if 
>> there are
>> already plans afoot for a meta-virtualization, then anything I did 
>> could be
>> pushed down keeping any other layers small.
>>
>> In particular I'm keen to drive some common kernel configuration, and 
>> work
>> on consolidating kernel features in trees versus having a whole set 
>> of out
>> of
>> tree modules with better tie in's to userspace enabling features
>> dynamically.
>>
>> So I'll keep an eye out for things as well and help where possible.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> Still in its infancy, and lots of stuff is still missing and/or not
>>>> working properly.
>>>>
>>>> Have a look if your interested, not much to see yet though.
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/nysan/meta-cloud.git
>>>>
>>>> Any thoughts on floating layer ML:s, i.e. an ML for so called
>>>> "out-of-tree" layers ?  Or is the common thought that all new recipes
>>>> should eventually go into oe-core ?
>>>
>>> The Yocto Project has been using the Yocto list for that and
>>> OpenEmbedded has openembedded-devel. Its not expected for everything to
>>> end up in OE-Core, quite the opposite.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>>> Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
>>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>>>
>>
>>
>>