From 6a5da7e157347d2c7bb103eda43e8988c4be655e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andreas Florath Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2016 22:38:08 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Spec for changing the block device handling During the creation of a disk image (e.g. for a VM), there is the need to create, setup, configure and afterwards detach some kind of storage where the newly installed OS can be copied to or directly installed in. Change-Id: I0a43e247fb9e258e3983db35362f627416983773 Depends-On: I7bd7e9fa94635621590f72702107e218155fef2a Signed-off-by: Andreas Florath --- .../v1/approved/block-device-overview.rst | 173 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 173 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/source/specs/v1/approved/block-device-overview.rst diff --git a/doc/source/specs/v1/approved/block-device-overview.rst b/doc/source/specs/v1/approved/block-device-overview.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..105d413b --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/source/specs/v1/approved/block-device-overview.rst @@ -0,0 +1,173 @@ +.. + This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported + License. + + http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode + +================== +Block Device Setup +================== + +During the creation of a disk image (e.g. for a VM), there is the need +to create, setup, configure and afterwards detach some kind of storage +where the newly installed OS can be copied to or directly installed +in. + +Problem description +=================== + +Currently dib is somewhat limited when it comes to setting up the +block device: only one partition that can be used for data. LVM, +encryption, multi-device or installation in an already existing block +device is not supported. + +In addition there are several places (main, lib, elements) where the +current way of handling the block device is used (spread knowledge and +implementation). + +Also it is not possible, to implement the handling as different +elements: it is not possible to pass results of one element in the +same phase to another element. Passing results from one phase to dib +main is limited. + +Use Cases +--------- + +Possible use cases are (Actor: End User) + +#. User wants to use an existing block device to install an system + image in (like hd, iSCSI, SAN lun, ...). +#. User wants that the system will be installed in multiple + partitions. +#. User wants that the partitioning is done in a specific way + (optimize for speed, optimize for size). +#. User wants to use LVM to install the system in (multiple PV, VG and + LV). +#. User wants to encrypt a partition or a LV where (parts) of the + system are installed in. +#. User wants specific file systems on specific partitions or LVs. + +Please note that these are only examples and details are described and +implemented by different sub-specs. + +Proposed change +=============== + +Because of the current way to execute elements, it is not possible to +have different elements for each feature. Instead the changes will be +implemented in a python module 'block_device' placed in the +'diskimage_builder' directory. + +The entry-point mechanism is used to create callable python programs. +These python programs are directly called from within the dib-main. + +There is the need to implement some functions or classes that take +care about common used new functionality: e.g. storing state between +phases, calling python sub-modules and passing arguments around. +These functionality is implemented as needed - therefore it is most +likely that the first patch implements also big parts of these +infrastructure tasks. + +Alternatives +------------ +#. Rewrite DIB in the way that elements can interchange data, even if + they are called during one phase. + This would influence the way all existing elements are called - and + might lead to unpredictable results. +#. In addition there is the need to introduce at least two additional + phases: because major parts of the block device handling are + currently done in main and these must be passed over to elements. +#. Another way would be to implement everything in one element: + this has the disadvantage, that other elements are not allowed to + use the 'block_device' phase any longer and also passing around + configuration and results is still not possible (see [3]). + +API impact +---------- + +Is described in the sub-elements. + +Security impact +--------------- + +Is described in the sub-elements. + +Other end user impact +--------------------- + +Paradigm changes from execute script to configuration for block_device +phase. + +Performance Impact +------------------ + +Is described in the sub-elements. + +Implementation +============== + +Assignee(s) +----------- + +Primary assignee: + ansreas (andreas@florath.net) + +Would be good, if other people would support this - and specify and +implement modules. + +Work Items +---------- + +This is an overview over changes in the block device layer. Each +level or module needs it's own spec. + +A first step is to reimplement the existing functionality, this +contains: +#. Level 0: Local Loop module + Use loop device on local image file + (This is already implemented: [1]) +#. Level 1: partitioning module + (This is already implemented: [4]) +#. Level 2: Create File System + An initial module uses ext4 only +#. Level 3: Mounting + +As a second step the following functionality can be added: +* Level 1: LVM module +* Level 2: Create File System + (swap) +* Level 2: Create File System + (vfat, needed for UEFI) +* Level 2: Create File System + (xfs) + +Of course any other functionality can also be added when needed and wanted. + +Dependencies +============ + +Is described in the sub-elements. + +Testing +======= + +Is described in the sub-elements. + +Documentation Impact +==================== + +Is described in the sub-elements. + +References +========== + +[1] Implementation of Level 0: Local Loop module + https://review.openstack.org/319591 +[2] 'Block Device Setup for Disk-Image-Builder' + https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/C80jjsAs4x +[3] partitioning-parted + This was a first try to implement everything + as an element - it shows the limitation. + https://review.openstack.org/313938 +[4] Implementation of Level 1: partitioning module + https://review.openstack.org/322671