Project Description
Everything we do in SUSE requires a certain amount of energy. This energy has a cost and it causes also a certain amount of CO2 emissions. In particular, as Kernel QA team, we run Kernel testing pretty often causing energy consumption that could be saved by introducing optimizations inside the LTP testing.
In this project we use a new parallel execution implementation, in order to talk about how software creation process can save energy and CO2 emissions inside a SW company.
Goal for this Hackweek
We want to answer the following questions:
- How many tests can run in parallel?
- How much energy we save per LTP execution in a virtualized system such as openQA?
- Can we improve the parallelization model to save more energy?
Resources
- runltp-ng: https://github.com/linux-test-project/runltp-ng/
- runltp-ng with parallelization support: https://github.com/acerv/runltp-ng/tree/parallel_coroutines
Jan 31
I had some issues with the runltp-ng
parallel execution, due to the choice of moving UI thread in the coroutines Thread. Tests took +30% time to complete with previous code, but now UI thread is working back again. Created a script to check how many parallel executions we have for all testing suites.
``` Suite: can Total tests: 3 Parallelizable tests: 2
Suite: cap_bounds Total tests: 1 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: commands Total tests: 37 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: connectors Total tests: 1 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: containers Total tests: 86 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: controllers Total tests: 346 Parallelizable tests: 1
Suite: cpuhotplug Total tests: 6 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: crashme Total tests: 4 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: crypto Total tests: 10 Parallelizable tests: 6
Suite: cve Total tests: 77 Parallelizable tests: 5
Suite: dio Total tests: 30 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: dmathreaddiotest Total tests: 7 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: fcntl-locktests Total tests: 1 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: filecaps Total tests: 1 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: fs Total tests: 68 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: fs_bind Total tests: 95 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: fspermssimple Total tests: 18 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: fs_readonly Total tests: 55 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: fsx Total tests: 1 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: hugetlb Total tests: 50 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: hyperthreading Total tests: 2 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: ima Total tests: 9 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: input Total tests: 6 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: io Total tests: 2 Parallelizable tests: 1
Suite: ipc Total tests: 8 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: irq Total tests: 1 Parallelizable tests: 1
Suite: kernel_misc Total tests: 16 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: kvm Total tests: 1 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: ltp-aio-stress Total tests: 54 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: ltp-aiodio.part1 Total tests: 140 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: ltp-aiodio.part2 Total tests: 83 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: ltp-aiodio.part3 Total tests: 48 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: ltp-aiodio.part4 Total tests: 57 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: math Total tests: 10 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: mm Total tests: 75 Parallelizable tests: 2
Suite: net.features Total tests: 62 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: net.ipv6 Total tests: 11 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: net.ipv6_lib Total tests: 6 Parallelizable tests: 2
Suite: net.multicast Total tests: 4 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: net.nfs Total tests: 84 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: net.rpc_tests Total tests: 51 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: net.sctp Total tests: 41 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: net.tcp_cmds Total tests: 21 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: net.tirpc_tests Total tests: 41 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: net_stress.appl Total tests: 10 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: netstress.brokenip Total tests: 11 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: net_stress.interface Total tests: 25 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: netstress.ipsecdccp Total tests: 104 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: netstress.ipsecicmp Total tests: 86 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: netstress.ipsecsctp Total tests: 104 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: netstress.ipsectcp Total tests: 104 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: netstress.ipsecudp Total tests: 106 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: net_stress.multicast Total tests: 24 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: net_stress.route Total tests: 14 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: nptl Total tests: 1 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: numa Total tests: 20 Parallelizable tests: 2
Suite: powermanagementtests Total tests: 5 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: powermanagementtests_exclusive Total tests: 5 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: pty Total tests: 9 Parallelizable tests: 1
Suite: s390x_tests Total tests: 1 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: sched Total tests: 11 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: scsi_debug.part1 Total tests: 140 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: securebits Total tests: 3 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: smack Total tests: 10 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: smoketest Total tests: 15 Parallelizable tests: 5
Suite: staging Total tests: 1 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: syscalls Total tests: 1384 Parallelizable tests: 526
Suite: syscalls-ipc Total tests: 61 Parallelizable tests: 26
Suite: tpm_tools Total tests: 12 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: tracing Total tests: 9 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: uevent Total tests: 3 Parallelizable tests: 0
Suite: watchqueue Total tests: 9 Parallelizable tests: 9
Total tests: 4017 Parallelizable tests: 589
14.66% of the tests are parallelizable ```
Feb 1
Added a new option runltp-ng --force-parallel
to force parallelization even if it's not enabled by tests, but using it causes application crashes, especially for more important suites such as syscalls
or syscalls-ipc
. Not a good idea to use it.
In general, I run a few suites collecting times we need to complete them. It seems the current rule selecting tests for parallel execution is not smart enough and most of the selected tests just end in a seconds or less. This will reflect on time results, where important testing suites, such as syscalls
, will end up just a few minutes before the normal execution. We can do probably better on that side by optimizing the rule, which is currently implemented here.
``` Qemu: Distro: Tumbleweed Kernel: 6.1.8-1-default SMP: 16 RAM: 2GB
syscalls: tests: 1384 parallel: 526 (38% of the tests)
16 workers: 31m 54s
1 worker: 36m 18s
syscalls-ipc: tests: 61 parallel: 26 (42.62% of the tests)
16 workers: 2m 4s
1 worker: 2m 7s
mm: tests: 75 parallel: 2 (42.62% of the tests)
16 workers: 8m 2s
1 worker: 8m 10s
cve: tests: 77 parallel: 5 (6.49% of the tests)
16 workers: 29m 53s
1 worker: 29m 57s
```
02-03 Feb
I focused more on syscalls
testing suites, since it's the most important
suite that can be easily parallelized. All power consumption measurements have
been taken using powerstat -a -R -d 0 1 3600
command, bringing data from
the start of the testing suite execution until the end. All stats have been
taken using my own laptop, since I wasn't able to access openQA workers
physically. Also, to improve measurements, it would be better to have an
external device for measuring power consumption. All tests run inside a Qemu
instance. According with openQA stats, syscalls
has been executed 35 times
in the last month (Jan 2023), so we take this value into account.
Environment
``` Laptop: Model: Lenovo T14s Gen 1 CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750U Memory: 16GB DDR4 Hard disk: NVMe SSD
Qemu:
CPUs: 16
RAM: 4096MB
```
Data
CO2 emission per kWh -> W = 0.244kg CO2/kWh (5% uncertainty)
Avg idle consumption -> I = 2.50 W
Cost energy in germany -> P = 0.534 $/kWh
syscalls exec per month -> R = 35
Normal execution
execution time: T1 = 38m 57s = 2337s
energy consumption: E1 = 9 Wh
monthly consumption: C1 = 35 * 9 = 0.315 kWh
Parallel execution (16 workers)
execution time: T2 = 35m 22s = 2122s -> 10% less
energy consumption: E2 = 10 Wh
monthly consumption: C2 = 35 * 10 = 0.350 kWh
Results
As we notice, there's a small difference between parallelization and normal execution, but overall it's so small that it won't particularly affect CO2 emissions or costs. In particular, in one year we have:
diff: D = (0.315 - 0.350) * 12 = +0.42 kWh
cost: C = D * P = -0.42 * 0.534 = +0.224 $
emissions: C02 = D * W = -0.42 * 0.244 = +0.102 kg
Considering that servers might consume a bit more energy during the execution, we might have bigger values, but still pretty small. The reason is that during parallelization we use more power to run many tests in parallel.
Optimizations
At the end, we can see that in terms of costs or emissions, we don't have a big impact, but in terms of time we still can have a significant impact in one year. We have the possibility to realease openQA workers in a faster way and to complete also other jobs a bit faster. And that of course will have an impact on production, energy consumption and emissions. By taking into account our data, we can say that in one year we will save:
(T1 - T2) * R * 12 = (2337 - 2122) * 35 * 12 ~25 hours
If we are able to introduce a smarter rule to select tests which can run in parallel, the amount of saved time per year might significantly increase. Also, we still have 332 syscalls tests (about 24%) using old API which can't run in parallel nowadays.
This project is part of:
Hack Week 22
Activity
Comments
Similar Projects
Modernize ocfs2 by goldwynr
Ocfs2 has gone into a stage of neglect and disrepair. Modernize the code to generate enough interest.
Goals: * Change the mount sequence to use fscontext * Move from using bufferhead to bio/folios * Use iomap * Run it through xfstests
Kill DMA and DMA32 memory zones by ptesarik
Description
Provide a better allocator for DMA-capable buffers, making the DMA and DMA32 zones obsolete.
Goals
Make a PoC kernel which can boot a x86 VM and a Raspberry Pi (because early RPi4 boards have some of the weirdest DMA constraints).
Resources
- LPC2024 talk:
- video:
Improve various phones kernel mainline support (Qualcomm, Exynos, MediaTek) by pvorel
Similar to previous hackweeks ( https://hackweek.opensuse.org/projects/improve-qualcomm-soc-msm8994-slash-msm8992-kernel-mainline-support, https://hackweek.opensuse.org/projects/test-mainline-kernel-on-an-older-qualcomm-soc-msm89xx-explore-mainline-kernel-qualcomm-mainlining) try to improve kernel mainline support of various phones.
early stage kdump support by mbrugger
Project Description
When we experience a early boot crash, we are not able to analyze the kernel dump, as user-space wasn't able to load the crash system. The idea is to make the crash system compiled into the host kernel (think of initramfs) so that we can create a kernel dump really early in the boot process.
Goal for the Hackweeks
- Investigate if this is possible and the implications it would have (done in HW21)
- Hack up a PoC (done in HW22 and HW23)
- Prepare RFC series (giving it's only one week, we are entering wishful thinking territory here).
update HW23
- I was able to include the crash kernel into the kernel Image.
- I'll need to find a way to load that from
init/main.c:start_kernel()
probably afterkcsan_init()
- I workaround for a smoke test was to hack
kexec_file_load()
systemcall which has two problems:- My initramfs in the porduction kernel does not have a new enough kexec version, that's not a blocker but where the week ended
- As the crash kernel is part of init.data it will be already stale once I can call
kexec_file_load()
from user-space.
The solution is probably to rewrite the POC so that the invocation can be done from init.text (that's my theory) but I'm not sure if I can reuse the kexec infrastructure in the kernel from there, which I rely on heavily.
update HW24
- Day1
- rebased on v6.12 with no problems others then me breaking the config
- setting up a new compilation and qemu/virtme env
- getting desperate as nothing works that used to work
- Day 2
- getting to call the invocation of loading the early kernel from
__init
afterkcsan_init()
- getting to call the invocation of loading the early kernel from
Day 3
- fix problem of memdup not being able to alloc so much memory... use 64K page sizes for now
- code refactoring
- I'm now able to load the crash kernel
- When using virtme I can boot into the crash kernel, also it doesn't boot completely (major milestone!), crash in
elfcorehdr_read_notes()
Day 4
- crash systems crashes (no pun intended) in
copy_old_mempage()
link; will need to understand elfcorehdr... - call path
vmcore_init() -> parse_crash_elf_headers() -> elfcorehdr_read() -> read_from_oldmem() -> copy_oldmem_page() -> copy_to_iter()
- crash systems crashes (no pun intended) in
Day 5
- hacking
arch/arm64/kernel/crash_dump.c:copy_old_mempage()
to see if crash system really starts. It does. - fun fact: retested with more reserved memory and with UEFI FW, host kernel crashes in init but directly starts the crash kernel, so it works (somehow) \o/
- hacking
TODOs
- fix elfcorehdr so that we actually can make use of all this...
- test where in the boot
__init()
chain we can/should callkexec_early_dump()
Improve UML page fault handler by ptesarik
Description
Improve UML handling of segmentation faults in kernel mode. Although such page faults are generally caused by a kernel bug, it is annoying if they cause an infinite loop, or panic the kernel. More importantly, a robust implementation allows to write KUnit tests for various guard pages, preventing potential kernel self-protection regressions.
Goals
Convert the UML page fault handler to use oops_* helpers, go through a few review rounds and finally get my patch series merged in 6.14.
Resources
Wrong initial attempt: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231215121431.680-1-petrtesarik@huaweicloud.com/T/
Hack on isotest-ng - a rust port of isotovideo (os-autoinst aka testrunner of openQA) by szarate
Description
Some time ago, I managed to convince ByteOtter to hack something that resembles isotovideo but in Rust, not because I believe that Perl is dead, but more because there are certain limitations in the perl code (how it was written), and its always hard to add new functionalities when they are about implementing a new backend, or fixing bugs (Along with people complaining that Perl is dead, and that they don't like it)
In reality, I wanted to see if this could be done, and ByteOtter proved that it could be, while doing an amazing job at hacking a vnc console, and helping me understand better what RuPerl needs to work.
I plan to keep working on this for the next few years, and while I don't aim for feature completion or replacing isotovideo tih isotest-ng (name in progress), I do plan to be able to use it on a daily basis, using specialized tooling with interfaces, instead of reimplementing everything in the backend
Todo
- Add
make
targets for testability, e.g "spawn qemu and type" - Add image search matching algorithm
- Add a Null test distribution provider
- Add a Perl Test Distribution Provider
- Fix unittests https://github.com/os-autoinst/isotest-ng/issues/5
- Research OpenTofu how to add new hypervisors/baremetal to OpenTofu
- Add an interface to openQA cli
Goals
- Implement at least one of the above, prepare proposals for GSoC
- Boot a system via it's BMC
Resources
See https://github.com/os-autoinst/isotest-ng
Make more sense of openQA test results using AI by livdywan
Description
AI has the potential to help with something many of us spend a lot of time doing which is making sense of openQA logs when a job fails.
User Story
Allison Average has a puzzled look on their face while staring at log files that seem to make little sense. Is this a known issue, something completely new or maybe related to infrastructure changes?
Goals
- Leverage a chat interface to help Allison
- Create a model from scratch based on data from openQA
- Proof of concept for automated analysis of openQA test results
Bonus
- Use AI to suggest solutions to merge conflicts
- This would need a merge conflict editor that can suggest solving the conflict
- Use image recognition for needles
Resources
Timeline
Day 1
- Conversing with open-webui to teach me how to create a model based on openQA test results
- Asking for example code using TensorFlow in Python
- Discussing log files to explore what to analyze
- Drafting a new project called Testimony (based on Implementing a containerized Python action) - the project name was also suggested by the assistant
Day 2
- Using NotebookLLM (Gemini) to produce conversational versions of blog posts
- Researching the possibility of creating a project logo with AI
- Asking open-webui, persons with prior experience and conducting a web search for advice
Highlights
- I briefly tested compared models to see if they would make me more productive. Between llama, gemma and mistral there was no amazing difference in the results for my case.
- Convincing the chat interface to produce code specific to my use case required very explicit instructions.
- Asking for advice on how to use open-webui itself better was frustratingly unfruitful both in trivial and more advanced regards.
- Documentation on source materials used by LLM's and tools for this purpose seems virtually non-existent - specifically if a logo can be generated based on particular licenses
Outcomes
- Chat interface-supported development is providing good starting points and open-webui being open source is more flexible than Gemini. Although currently some fancy features such as grounding and generated podcasts are missing.
- Allison still has to be very experienced with openQA to use a chat interface for test review. Publicly available system prompts would make that easier, though.
Automated Test Report reviewer by oscar-barrios
Description
In SUMA/Uyuni team we spend a lot of time reviewing test reports, analyzing each of the test cases failing, checking if the test is a flaky test, checking logs, etc.
Goals
Speed up the review by automating some parts through AI, in a way that we can consume some summary of that report that could be meaningful for the reviewer.
Resources
No idea about the resources yet, but we will make use of:
- HTML/JSON Report (text + screenshots)
- The Test Suite Status GithHub board (via API)
- The environment tested (via SSH)
- The test framework code (via files)
Yearly Quality Engineering Ask me Anything - AMA for not-engineering by szarate
Goal
Get a closer look at how developers work on the Engineering team (R & D) of SUSE, and close the collaboration gap between GSI and Engineering
Why?
Santiago can go over different development workflows, and can do a deepdive into how Quality Engineering works (think of my QE Team, the advocates for your customers), The idea of this session is to help open the doors to opportunities for collaboration, and broaden our understanding of SUSE as a whole.
Objectives
- Give $audience a small window on how to get some questions answered either on the spot or within days of how some things at engineering are done
- Give Santiago Zarate from Quality Engineering a look into how $audience sees the engineering departments, and find out possibilities of further collaboration
How?
By running an "Ask me Anything" session, which is a format of a kind of open Q & A session, where participants ask the host multiple questions.
How to make it happen?
I'm happy to help joining a call or we can do it async (online/in person is more fun). Ping me over email-slack and lets make the magic happen!. Doesn't need to be during hackweek, but we gotta kickstart the idea during hackweek ;)
Rules
The rules are simple, the more questions the more fun it will be; while this will be only a window into engineering, it can also be the place to help all of us get to a similar level of understanding of the processes that are behind our respective areas of the organization.
Dynamics
The host will be monitoring the questions on some pre-agreed page, and try to answer to the best of their knowledge, if a question is too difficult or the host doesn't have the answer, he will do his best to provide an answer at a later date.
Atendees are encouraged to add questions beforehand; in the case there aren't any, we would be looking at how Quality Engineering tests new products or performs regression tests
Agenda
- Introduction of Santiago Zarate, Product Owner of Quality Engineering Core team
- Introduction of the Group/Team/Persons interested
- Ice breaker
- AMA time! Add your questions $PAGE
- Looking at QE Workflows: How is
- A maintenance update being tested before being released to our customers
- Products in development are tested before making it generally available
- Engineering Opportunity Board
Drag Race - comparative performance testing for pull requests by balanza
Description
«Sophia, a backend developer, submitted a pull request with optimizations for a critical database query. Once she pushed her code, an automated load test ran, comparing her query against the main branch. Moments later, she saw a new comment automatically added to her PR: the comparison results showed reduced execution time and improved efficiency. Smiling, Sophia messaged her team, “Performance gains confirmed!”»
Goals
- To have a convenient and ergonomic framework to describe test scenarios, including environment and seed;
- to compare results from different tests
- to have a GitHub action that executes such tests on a CI environment
Resources
The MVP will be built on top of Preevy and K6.