<div dir="ltr">OPNFV also uses distributed labs and came to agreement in the community on what those should look like. <div> </div><div><a href="https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/pharos/Pharos+Home">https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/pharos/Pharos+Home</a> </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"> <div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"> --- Mike Dolan VP of Strategic Programs The Linux Foundation Office: +1.330.460.3250 Cell: +1.440.552.5322 Skype: michaelkdolan <a href="mailto:mdolan@linuxfoundation.org" target="_blank">mdolan@linuxfoundation.org</a> ---</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div> <div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:06 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim <<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"> <div class="m_7349304858349545197WordSection1"> Yes, agreed, more proposals and participation are always good. In terms of the lab models that George asked about, we decided early in our discussions to implement a distributed CI solution. Thomas has done great work to integrate this with Patchwork, so you can see which CI tests each patch has passed/failed at: <a href="http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/project/dpdk/list/" target="_blank">http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/project/dpdk/list/</a> (see the Success/Warning/Fail (S/W/F) columns). There was interest in creating a community lab to be hosted by the Linux Foundation for independent performance testing and for identifying performance regressions. It was felt that results from an independent lab would have more credibility than results from vendor labs. As Heqing said, we’ll have a proposal on this after the PRC New Year holiday. If we end up not having budget for this, or don’t agree that it’s required, then we can explore other options such as a distributed solution. <a name="m_7349304858349545197__MailEndCompose"> </a> <div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt"> <div> <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"> <a name="m_7349304858349545197______replyseparator"></a>From: Zhu, Heqing Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 5:39 PM To: George Zhao <<a href="mailto:George.Y.Zhao@huawei.com" target="_blank">George.Y.Zhao@huawei.com</a>>; O'Driscoll, Tim <<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>>; Ed Warnicke <<a href="mailto:hagbard@gmail.com" target="_blank">hagbard@gmail.com</a>> Cc: Wiles, Keith <<a href="mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com" target="_blank">keith.wiles@intel.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org" target="_blank">moving@dpdk.org</a>; Zhu, Heqing <<a href="mailto:heqing.zhu@intel.com" target="_blank">heqing.zhu@intel.com</a>> Subject: RE: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th </div> </div><div><div class="h5"> As matter of fact today, Intel helps the DPDK release validation. As Tim said, we will make a proposal after CNY. DPDK is an open community, more proposals and participation are welcomed. <div> <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"> From: moving [<a href="mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org" target="_blank">mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org</a>] On Behalf Of George Zhao Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:29 AM To: O'Driscoll, Tim <<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>>; Ed Warnicke <<a href="mailto:hagbard@gmail.com" target="_blank">hagbard@gmail.com</a>> Cc: Wiles, Keith <<a href="mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com" target="_blank">keith.wiles@intel.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org" target="_blank">moving@dpdk.org</a> Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th </div> </div> I know there are two ways normally community lab operate, one is like <a href="http://fd.io" target="_blank">fd.io</a> project, CSIT lab is managed by Linux Foundation, the other is like OpenDaylight where member companies open their lab to share with community. Do we decide which way for DPDK lab? George <div> <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"> From: moving [<a href="mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org" target="_blank">mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org</a>] On Behalf Of O'Driscoll, Tim Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:10 AM To: Ed Warnicke Cc: Wiles, Keith; <a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org" target="_blank">moving@dpdk.org</a> Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th </div> </div> We haven’t yet agreed that we definitely need a lab, how big it needs to be, and how much it will cost. Our team in PRC have been working on a proposal, but with their New Year holidays that’s a couple of weeks away from being ready to share with the community. The scope we’ve been discussing for the lab is quite small when compared to FD.io’s CSIT project. It would be a reference lab to provide independent performance data and to identify any performance regression. The ~$200k I quoted for a single rack is really the minimum starting point. If we agree we need more and have the budget to cover it, then we can expand beyond that. Mike will explore interest in the lab as part of his discussions, and we’ll also have one of our PRC team present the proposal to the community when they return from their New Year holiday. After that, we’ll know more about the level of interest in the lab and the cost associated with it. Tim <div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt"> <div> <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"> From: Ed Warnicke [<a href="mailto:hagbard@gmail.com" target="_blank">mailto:hagbard@gmail.com</a>] Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:31 PM To: O'Driscoll, Tim <<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>> Cc: Wiles, Keith <<a href="mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com" target="_blank">keith.wiles@intel.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org" target="_blank">moving@dpdk.org</a> Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th </div> </div> <div> Question... are you only pricing for *one* rack? I ask, because *one* rack can fill pretty quick... <div> </div> <div> Ed </div> </div> <div> <div> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim <<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt"> > From: Wiles, Keith > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim <<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>> > wrote: > > > > > > Membership costs: > > - Discussed potential membership costs. My proposal was ~$50-100k for > Gold, ~$5-$20k for Silver. Most agreed that this was a good starting > point for discussions. > > I thought we were trending toward the higher $100k range as the lab was > going cost a fair bit am I wrong here? The membership rates we decide on will need to strike a balance between raising budget and having a broad membership that's representative of the breadth of DPDK contributions/usage. If we choose a high figure it will limit the number of companies prepared to join. If we choose too low a number then we won't maximize our budget. We need to strike a balance between the two. The next step we agreed was for Mike to identify who's interested in membership (he's already posted on the moving list asking for contacts) and begin to have individual discussions with them. Feedback on membership rates from these discussions will help us to make a final decision. I think we need to be careful on lab costs. Some high figures have been mentioned based on FD.io, but from the beginning of these discussions we've agreed that we want a smaller scope and lower cost level for DPDK. Rough estimate for a full rack with a part time sys admin and a part time release engineer is ~$200k/year. We also discussed yesterday whether lab costs should be fully accounted for in the Gold membership fee, or if they should be handled separately. Mike will also ask about interest in the lab as part of his discussions which will help us to reach a conclusion on this. </blockquote> </div> </div> </div> </div></div></div> </div> </div> </blockquote></div> </div>