From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 001841FF141 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2026 12:55:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E72881D648; Mon, 30 Mar 2026 12:55:36 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2026 12:55:01 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH perl-rs v2 13/40] pve-rs: resource-scheduling: use generic usage implementation From: "Daniel Kral" To: "Dominik Rusovac" , X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0-38-g7088c3642f2c-dirty References: <20260324183029.1274972-1-d.kral@proxmox.com> <20260324183029.1274972-14-d.kral@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1774868047487 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -1.441 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 1 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 1 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 1 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: XU3YSHCVYL6GXNAG77SJHDOUKAVDIEGP X-Message-ID-Hash: XU3YSHCVYL6GXNAG77SJHDOUKAVDIEGP X-MailFrom: d.kral@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Fri Mar 27, 2026 at 3:13 PM CET, Dominik Rusovac wrote: > lgtm, consider modulo nits > > On Tue Mar 24, 2026 at 7:29 PM CET, Daniel Kral wrote: >> The proxmox_resource_scheduling crate provides a generic usage >> implementation, which is backwards compatible with the pve_static >> bindings. This reduces the static resource scheduling bindings to a >> slightly thinner wrapper. > > good measure, to make proxmox-resource-scheduling handle usage > >> >> This also exposes the new `add_resource(...)` binding, which allows >> callers to add services with additional state other than the usage >> stats. It is exposed as `add_service(...)` to be consistent with the >> naming of the rest of the existing methods. >> >> Where it is sensible for the bindings, the documentation is extended >> with a link to the documentation of the underlying methods. >> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Kral >> --- >> changes v1 -> v2: >> - add patch message for context >> - change from only creating the >> proxmox_resource_scheduling::scheduler::ClusterUsage (now, >> proxmox_resource_scheduling::scheduler::Scheduler), to using the new >> but backwards-compatible `Usage` implementation instead >> - this essentially also squashes the 'store services stats independently >> of node' patch in here as this is also tracked by the generic `Usage` >> impl >> - add `usage` and `resource` crate for shared code > > [snip] > >> + >> +impl> TryFrom> for Resource { >> + type Error =3D Error; >> + >> + fn try_from(resource: PveResource) -> Result { >> + let state =3D if resource.running { >> + ResourceState::Started >> + } else { >> + ResourceState::Starting >> + }; >> + >> + let placement =3D match (resource.current_node, resource.target= _node) { > > as it came up off-list, we might not only prohibit equivalence of=20 > current_node and target_node in proxmox-resource-scheduling, but=20 > also here > Thanks! Even though it's redundant, I added here now to make it a little easier to track down what the constraints are here. >> + (Some(current_node), Some(target_node)) =3D> ResourcePlacem= ent::Moving { >> + current_node, >> + target_node, >> + }, >> + (Some(current_node), None) | (None, Some(current_node)) =3D= > { > > it would be good to have a comment (// NOTE: ...) explaining as to why > this arm's code > I've decided to move this behavior to where it's relevant in the pve-ha-manager (PVE::HA::Usage::{Dynamic,Static}::add_service()) as it's easier to understand there why this is true. >> + ResourcePlacement::Stationary { current_node } >> + } >> + _ =3D> bail!("neither current_node nor target_node are set"= ), >> + }; >> + >> + Ok(Resource::new(resource.stats.into(), state, placement)) >> + } >> +} > > [snip] > >> +impl UsageAggregator for StartedResourceAggregator { >> + fn aggregate(usage: &Usage) -> Vec { >> + usage >> + .nodes_iter() >> + .map(|(nodename, node)| { > > nice fold! > > nit: by making `node_stats` mutable in the first place, variable > shadowing can be avoided, see: > > let stats =3D node.resources_iter().fold(node.stats(), |mut node_stat= s, sid| { > =20 > if let Some(resource) =3D usage.get_resource(sid) { > node_stats.add_started_resource(&resource.stats()); > } > =20 > node_stats > }); > Nice, thanks! >> + let stats =3D node.resources_iter().fold(node.stats(), = |node_stats, sid| { >> + let mut node_stats =3D node_stats; >> + >> + if let Some(resource) =3D usage.get_resource(sid) { >> + node_stats.add_started_resource(&resource.stats= ()); >> + } >> + >> + node_stats >> + }); >> + >> + NodeUsage { >> + name: nodename.to_string(), >> + stats, >> + } >> + }) >> + .collect() >> + } >> +} > > Reviewed-by: Dominik Rusovac