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

updates to device failures for alpha2 #4862

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 10, 2024
+140 −50
Merged

updates to device failures for alpha2 #4862

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
182 changes: 136 additions & 46 deletions keps/sig-node/4680-add-resource-health-to-pod-status/README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
- [e2e tests](#e2e-tests)
- [Graduation Criteria](#graduation-criteria)
- [Alpha](#alpha)
- [Alpha2](#alpha2)
- [Beta](#beta)
- [GA](#ga)
- [Upgrade / Downgrade Strategy](#upgrade--downgrade-strategy)
Expand All @@ -44,9 +45,9 @@
Items marked with (R) are required *prior to targeting to a milestone / release*.

- [X] (R) Enhancement issue in release milestone, which links to KEP dir in [kubernetes/enhancements] (not the initial KEP PR)
- [ ] (R) KEP approvers have approved the KEP status as `implementable`
- [ ] (R) Design details are appropriately documented
- [ ] (R) Test plan is in place, giving consideration to SIG Architecture and SIG Testing input (including test refactors)
- [X] (R) KEP approvers have approved the KEP status as `implementable`
- [X] (R) Design details are appropriately documented
- [X] (R) Test plan is in place, giving consideration to SIG Architecture and SIG Testing input (including test refactors)
- [ ] e2e Tests for all Beta API Operations (endpoints)
- [ ] (R) Ensure GA e2e tests meet requirements for [Conformance Tests](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/conformance-tests.md)
- [ ] (R) Minimum Two Week Window for GA e2e tests to prove flake free
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -94,7 +95,10 @@ Exposing unhealthy devices in Pod Status will provide a generic way to understan

As part of the InPlacePodVerticalScaling KEP, the two new fields were introduced in Pod Status to reflect the currently allocated resources for the Pod:

```
```go
type ContainerStatus struct {
...

// AllocatedResources represents the compute resources allocated for this container by the
// node. Kubelet sets this value to Container.Resources.Requests upon successful pod admission
// and after successfully admitting desired pod resize.
Expand All @@ -107,6 +111,9 @@ As part of the InPlacePodVerticalScaling KEP, the two new fields were introduced
// +featureGate=InPlacePodVerticalScaling
// +optional
Resources *ResourceRequirements `json:"resources,omitempty" protobuf:"bytes,11,opt,name=resources"`

...
}
```

One field reflects the resource requests and limits and the other actual allocated resources.
Expand All @@ -117,60 +124,106 @@ The proposal is to keep this structure as-is to simplify parsing of well-known R

The proposal is to introduce an additional field:

```go
type ContainerStatus struct {
...

// AllocatedResourcesStatus represents the status of various resources
// allocated for this Container. In case of DRA, the same resource health
// can be reported multiple times if it is associated with the multiple containers.
// +featureGate=ResourceHealthStatus
// +optional
// +patchMergeKey=name
// +patchStrategy=merge
// +listType=map
// +listMapKey=name
AllocatedResourcesStatus []ResourceStatus `json:"allocatedResourcesStatus,omitempty" patchStrategy:"merge" patchMergeKey:"name" protobuf:"bytes,14,rep,name=allocatedResourcesStatus"`

...
}
```
SergeyKanzhelev marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
// AllocatedResourcesStatus represents the status of various resources
// allocated for this Pod.
AllocatedResourcesStatus ResourcesStatus

type ResourcesStatus map[ResourceName]ResourceStatus
The `ResourceStatus` is defined as:

```go
type ResourceStatus struct {
// map of unique Resource ID to its health.
// At a minimum, ResourceID must uniquely identify the Resource
// allocated to the Pod on the Node for the lifetime of a Pod.
// See ResourceID type for it's definition.
Resources map[ResourceID] ResourceHealth

// allow to extend this struct in future with the overall health fields or things like Device Plugin version
// Name of the resource. Must be unique within the pod and in case of non-DRA resource, match one of the resources from the pod spec.
// For DRA resources, the value must be claim:claim_name/request.
// The claim_name must match one of the claims from resourceClaims field in the podSpec.
// +required
Name ResourceName `json:"name" protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=name"`
johnbelamaric marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
// List of unique Resources health. Each element in the list contains an unique resource ID and resource health.
// At a minimum, ResourceID must uniquely identify the Resource
// allocated to the Pod on the Node for the lifetime of a Pod.
// See ResourceID type for it's definition.
// +listType=map
// +listMapKey=resourceID
Resources []ResourceHealth `json:"resources,omitempty" protobuf:"bytes,2,rep,name=resources"`
}

type ResourceHealthStatus string

const (
ResourceHealthStatusHealthy ResourceHealthStatus = "Healthy"
ResourceHealthStatusUnhealthy ResourceHealthStatus = "Unhealthy"
ResourceHealthStatusUnknown ResourceHealthStatus = "Unknown"
)

// ResourceID is calculated based on the source of this resource health information.
// For DevicePlugin:
// deviceplugin:DeviceID, where DeviceID is from the Device structure of DevicePlugin's ListAndWatchResponse type: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/eda1c780543a27c078450e2f17d674471e00f494/staging/src/k8s.io/kubelet/pkg/apis/deviceplugin/v1alpha/api.proto#L61-L73
//
// DeviceID, where DeviceID is from the Device structure of DevicePlugin's ListAndWatchResponse type: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/eda1c780543a27c078450e2f17d674471e00f494/staging/src/k8s.io/kubelet/pkg/apis/deviceplugin/v1alpha/api.proto#L61-L73
johnbelamaric marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
//
// DevicePlugin ID is usually a constant for the lifetime of a Node and typically can be used to uniquely identify the device on the node.
// For DRA:
// dra:<driver name>/<pool name>/<device name>: such a device can be looked up in the information published by that DRA driver to learn more about it. It is designed to be globally unique in a cluster.
//
// <driver name>/<pool name>/<device name>: such a device can be looked up in the information published by that DRA driver to learn more about it. It is designed to be globally unique in a cluster.
johnbelamaric marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
type ResourceID string

// ResourceHealth represents the health of a resource. It has the latest device health information.
// This is a part of KEP https://kep.k8s.io/4680 and historical health changes are planned to be added in future iterations of a KEP.
type ResourceHealth struct {
// List of conditions with the transition times
Conditions []ResourceHealthCondition
// ResourceID is the unique identifier of the resource. See the ResourceID type for more information.
ResourceID ResourceID `json:"resourceID" protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=resourceID"`
// Health of the resource.
// can be one of:
// - Healthy: operates as normal
// - Unhealthy: reported unhealthy. We consider this a temporary health issue
// since we do not have a mechanism today to distinguish
// temporary and permanent issues.
// - Unknown: The status cannot be determined.
// For example, Device Plugin got unregistered and hasn't been re-registered since.
//
// In future we may want to introduce the PermanentlyUnhealthy Status.
Health ResourceHealthStatus `json:"health,omitempty" protobuf:"bytes,2,name=health"`
}
```

In alpha2 in order to support pod level DRA resources, the following field will be added to the PodStatus:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How are "pod level DRA resources" defined?

Is the goal to list health of all allocated devices here and then also for each container that references them?

Not a blocker for the KEP, but this needs to be clarified before implementing this API.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would think container-associated devices will be in container statuses. And this is for network DRA for now

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes. I would expect devices associated with requests that are attached to containers get sorted into those. Resource claims not tied to any container, but tied to this pod, would show up in here. In the normal case, that's just network devices. The one question I have is if someone does tie a request to a container, but the actual content of the request is pod level, which slice should it show up in? I think probably pod level?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That's why I was asking for a definition. The code needs to decide where to put things and users must know where to expect what.

The only definition that I can think of is "each container reports everything it has access to" and then this here is "whatever is not accessed by any container" - so basically everything that is left.

We don't have an explicit "pod level" flag.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But a container doesn't have "access" to a network device. The network namespace is pod level. So, that driver would know to put it at the pod level.

Also, who is doing the sorting? Based on the grpc call, it's actually kubelet that sorts the devices into these buckets, since the response only includes the deviceid and health. kubelet wouldn't know how to sort these except by how the requests are defined.

Looking a little deeper, if kubelet is going to sort individual device ids coming back from the grpc call into the right container buckets, it needs the mapping from device id -> container. That would come from here. So kubelet will need to load the resource claim status, and create a map of allocated device ID from that array into claim and request, then look up in the podspec and containerspecs which container and/or pod that goes to.

So, if a user lists a pod-level request in a container, then it will show up in that container. Likewise, if two containers share a device via a claim, it will show up in BOTH containers statuses!

I guess that's ok? or should we just have one list of all the claims and their device statuses, and make the user map those back to containers? Seems unfriendly.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, I think it's ok.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The grRPC API isn't important enough to block the KEP, but this here looks like something that hasn't been thought through yet.

However, it's also "only the API", so perhaps we can waive it through and do the real API review during the implementation review? I'll defer to @johnbelamaric here.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd like to see the discussion above captured in the KEP - basically grab the comment above and add it to design details. Key points being:

  • driver only needs to report deviceID/health pairs
  • kubelet needs to use the resource claims status and pod/container specs to map deviceID -> claim/request names -> correct status field here
  • for DRA, resource name for container resources is something like the string "claim" along with the Name and Request from the container ResourceRequirements ResourceClaim
  • for DRA, any device not mapped to a container will show up in the pod resource list, and will use "claim" along with the name from PodResourceClaim Name. I don't think we can get a request name at that point, I think without associating the claim to a specfic container, we just actuate all the requests in the claim?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think without associating the claim to a specfic container, we just actuate all the requests in the claim?

We always prepare all claims referenced by a pod , whether they are referenced by a container or not. Based on the information returned by the driver, the kubelet then knows how to associated CDI device IDs with containers.

There is no such thing as "actuate a request".

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There is no such thing as "actuate a request".

Got it, thanks. So the above should work.


```go
// PodStatus represents information about the status of a pod. Status may trail the actual
// state of a system.
type PodStatus struct {

...

// Status of resource claims.
// +featureGate=DynamicResourceAllocation
// +optional
ResourceClaimStatuses []PodResourceClaimStatus
johnbelamaric marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

// This condition type is replicating other condition types exposed by various status APIs
type ResourceHealthCondition struct {
// can be one of:
// - Healthy: operates as normal
// - Unhealthy: reported unhealthy. We consider this a temporary health issue
// since we do not have a mechanism today to distinguish
// temporary and permanent issues.
// - Unknown: The status cannot be determined.
// For example, Device Plugin got unregistered and hasn't been re-registered since.
//
// In future we may want to introduce the PermanentlyUnhealthy Status.
Type string

// Status of the condition, one of True, False, Unknown.
Status ConditionStatus
// The last time the condition transitioned from one status to another.
// +optional
LastTransitionTime metav1.Time
// The reason for the condition's last transition.
// +optional
Reason string
// A human readable message indicating details about the transition.
// +optional
Message string
...

// AllocatedResourcesStatus represents the status of various resources
// allocated for this Pod, but not associated with any of containers.
// +featureGate=ResourceHealthStatus
// +optional
// +patchMergeKey=name
// +patchStrategy=merge
// +listType=map
// +listMapKey=name
AllocatedResourcesStatus []ResourceStatus `json:"allocatedResourcesStatus,omitempty" patchStrategy:"merge" patchMergeKey:"name" protobuf:"bytes,14,rep,name=allocatedResourcesStatus"`
}
```

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -233,7 +286,6 @@ We should consider introducing another field to the Status that will be a free f
### DRA implementation details

Today DRA does not return the health of the device back to kubelet. The proposal is to extend the

type `NamedResourcesInstance` (from [pkg/apis/resource/namedresources.go](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/790dfdbe386e4a115f41d38058c127d2dd0e6f44/pkg/apis/resource/namedresources.go#L29-L37)) to include the Health field the same way it is done in
the Device Plugin as well as a device ID.

Expand All @@ -245,7 +297,41 @@ The API will be limited to "prepared" devices and include the claim `name/namesp

Kubelet will react on this field the same way as we propose to do it for the Device Plugin.

Specific implementation details will be added for the beta.
The new method will be added to the same gRPC server that serves the [Node service](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/04bba3c222bb2c5b1b1565713de4bf334ee7fbe4/staging/src/k8s.io/kubelet/pkg/apis/dra/v1alpha4/api.proto#L34) interface (Node service exposes
`NodePrepareResources` and `NodeUnprepareResources`). The new interface will have a `Device` structure similar to Node Service's device, with the added `health` field:

``` proto
service NodeHealth {
...

// WatchDevicesStatus returns a stream of List of Devices
// Whenever a Device state change or a Device disappears, WatchDevicesStatus
// returns the new list.
// This method is optional and may not be implemented.
rpc WatchDevicesStatus(Empty) returns (stream DevicesStatusResponse) {}
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you put this into a new gRPC interface? Then it can be versioned as part of this KEP and drivers are not forced to implement this method - they would be if it became part of the NodeServer interface.

At a practical level it'll help avoid code conflicts. I need to promote that dra/v1alpha4 API to dra/v1beta1 in 1.32.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there any implications of having two interfaces running? Would it mean we need an extra port for the new interface?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You can serve different gRPC interfaces over the same connection. They are like different endpoints in an HTTP server.

That we version them is a bit odd. There's no difference between v1alpha4 and v1beta1, but because we put the version into the name, they are completely different as far as gRPC is concerned. But that's just an aside.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm okay with treating this as an implementation detail that'll get addressed later - no need to update the KEP for it now.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

added a note about it.


// ListAndWatch returns a stream of List of Devices
// Whenever a Device state change or a Device disappears, ListAndWatch
// returns the new list
message DevicesStatusResponse {
repeated Device devices = 1;
}

message Device {
... existing fields ...
// The device itself. Required.
string device_name = 3;
... existing fields ...

// Health of the device, can be Healthy or Unhealthy.
SergeyKanzhelev marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
string Health = 5;
}
```

Implementation will ignore the `Unimplemented` error when the DRA plugin doesn't have this interface implemented.

Note, the gRPC details are still a subject to change and will go thru API review during the implementation.

### Test Plan

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -296,9 +382,13 @@ Test coverage will be listed once tests are implemented.
- Feature implemented in Device Manager behind a feature flag
- Initial e2e tests completed and enabled

#### Alpha2

- Feature implemented in DRA behind a feature flag
- e2e tests completed and enabled for DRA

#### Beta

- Feature is implemented in DRA behind the feature flag
- Complete e2e tests coverage

#### GA
Expand Down
8 changes: 4 additions & 4 deletions keps/sig-node/4680-add-resource-health-to-pod-status/kep.yaml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -28,13 +28,13 @@ stage: alpha #|beta|stable
# The most recent milestone for which work toward delivery of this KEP has been
# done. This can be the current (upcoming) milestone, if it is being actively
# worked on.
latest-milestone: "v1.31"
latest-milestone: "v1.32"

# The milestone at which this feature was, or is targeted to be, at each stage.
milestone:
alpha: "v1.31"
beta: "v1.32"
stable: "v1.34"
alpha: "v1.31" # 1.32 will contain an alpha2 with more features
beta: "v1.33"
stable: "v1.35"

# The following PRR answers are required at alpha release
# List the feature gate name and the components for which it must be enabled
Expand Down