|
| 1 | +--- |
| 2 | +kep-number: 35 |
| 3 | +title: Node Topology Manager |
| 4 | +authors: |
| 5 | + - "@ConnorDoyle" |
| 6 | + - "@balajismaniam" |
| 7 | + - "@lmdaly" |
| 8 | +owning-sig: sig-node |
| 9 | +participating-sigs: |
| 10 | + - sig-node |
| 11 | +reviewers: |
| 12 | + - "@vikasc" |
| 13 | + - "@derekwaynecarr" |
| 14 | + - "@jeremyeder" |
| 15 | + - "@RenaudWasTaken" |
| 16 | +approvers: |
| 17 | + - "@dawnchen" |
| 18 | + - "@derekwaynecarr" |
| 19 | +editor: Louise Daly |
| 20 | +creation-date: 2019-01-30 |
| 21 | +last-updated: 2019-01-30 |
| 22 | +status: implementable |
| 23 | +see-also: |
| 24 | +replaces: |
| 25 | +superseded-by: |
| 26 | +--- |
| 27 | + |
| 28 | +# Node Topology Manager |
| 29 | + |
| 30 | +_Authors:_ |
| 31 | + |
| 32 | +* @ConnorDoyle - Connor Doyle <[email protected]> |
| 33 | +* @balajismaniam - Balaji Subramaniam <[email protected]> |
| 34 | +* @lmdaly - Louise M. Daly <[email protected]> |
| 35 | + |
| 36 | +**Contents:** |
| 37 | + |
| 38 | +* [Overview](#overview) |
| 39 | +* [Motivation](#motivation) |
| 40 | + * [Goals](#goals) |
| 41 | + * [Non-Goals](#non-goals) |
| 42 | + * [User Stories](#user-stories) |
| 43 | +* [Proposal](#proposal) |
| 44 | + * [User Stories](#user-stories) |
| 45 | + * [Proposed Changes](#proposed-changes) |
| 46 | + * [New Component: Topology Manager](#new-component-topology-manager) |
| 47 | + * [Computing Preferred Affinity](#computing-preferred-affinity) |
| 48 | + * [New Interfaces](#new-interfaces) |
| 49 | + * [Changes to Existing Components](#changes-to-existing-components) |
| 50 | +* [Graduation Criteria](#graduation-criteria) |
| 51 | + * [alpha (target v1.11)](#alpha-target-v1.11) |
| 52 | + * [beta](#beta) |
| 53 | + * [GA (stable)](#ga-stable) |
| 54 | +* [Challenges](#challenges) |
| 55 | +* [Limitations](#limitations) |
| 56 | +* [Alternatives](#alternatives) |
| 57 | +* [Reference](#reference) |
| 58 | + |
| 59 | +# Overview |
| 60 | + |
| 61 | +An increasing number of systems leverage a combination of CPUs and |
| 62 | +hardware accelerators to support latency-critical execution and |
| 63 | +high-throughput parallel computation. These include workloads in fields |
| 64 | +such as telecommunications, scientific computing, machine learning, |
| 65 | +financial services and data analytics. Such hybrid systems comprise a |
| 66 | +high performance environment. |
| 67 | + |
| 68 | +In order to extract the best performance, optimizations related to CPU |
| 69 | +isolation and memory and device locality are required. However, in |
| 70 | +Kubernetes, these optimizations are handled by a disjoint set of |
| 71 | +components. |
| 72 | + |
| 73 | +This proposal provides a mechanism to coordinate fine-grained hardware |
| 74 | +resource assignments for different components in Kubernetes. |
| 75 | + |
| 76 | +# Motivation |
| 77 | + |
| 78 | +Multiple components in the Kubelet make decisions about system |
| 79 | +topology-related assignments: |
| 80 | + |
| 81 | +- CPU manager |
| 82 | + - The CPU manager makes decisions about the set of CPUs a container is |
| 83 | +allowed to run on. The only implemented policy as of v1.8 is the static |
| 84 | +one, which does not change assignments for the lifetime of a container. |
| 85 | +- Device manager |
| 86 | + - The device manager makes concrete device assignments to satisfy |
| 87 | +container resource requirements. Generally devices are attached to one |
| 88 | +peripheral interconnect. If the device manager and the CPU manager are |
| 89 | +misaligned, all communication between the CPU and the device can incur |
| 90 | +an additional hop over the processor interconnect fabric. |
| 91 | +- Container Network Interface (CNI) |
| 92 | + - NICs including SR-IOV Virtual Functions have affinity to one socket, |
| 93 | +with measurable performance ramifications. |
| 94 | + |
| 95 | +*Related Issues:* |
| 96 | + |
| 97 | +- [Hardware topology awareness at node level (including NUMA)][k8s-issue-49964] |
| 98 | +- [Discover nodes with NUMA architecture][nfd-issue-84] |
| 99 | +- [Support VF interrupt binding to specified CPU][sriov-issue-10] |
| 100 | +- [Proposal: CPU Affinity and NUMA Topology Awareness][proposal-affinity] |
| 101 | + |
| 102 | +Note that all of these concerns pertain only to multi-socket systems. Correct |
| 103 | +behavior requires that the kernel receive accurate topology information from |
| 104 | +the underlying hardware (typically via the SLIT table). See section 5.2.16 |
| 105 | +and 5.2.17 of the |
| 106 | +[ACPI Specification](http://www.acpi.info/DOWNLOADS/ACPIspec50.pdf) for more |
| 107 | +information. |
| 108 | + |
| 109 | +## Goals |
| 110 | + |
| 111 | +- Arbitrate preferred socket affinity for containers based on input from |
| 112 | + CPU manager and Device Manager. |
| 113 | +- Provide an internal interface and pattern to integrate additional |
| 114 | + topology-aware Kubelet components. |
| 115 | + |
| 116 | +## Non-Goals |
| 117 | + |
| 118 | +- _Inter-device connectivity:_ Decide device assignments based on direct |
| 119 | + device interconnects. This issue can be separated from socket |
| 120 | + locality. Inter-device topology can be considered entirely within the |
| 121 | + scope of the Device Manager, after which it can emit possible |
| 122 | + socket affinities. The policy to reach that decision can start simple |
| 123 | + and iterate to include support for arbitrary inter-device graphs. |
| 124 | +- _HugePages:_ This proposal assumes that pre-allocated HugePages are |
| 125 | + spread among the available memory nodes in the system. We further assume |
| 126 | + the operating system provides best-effort local page allocation for |
| 127 | + containers (as long as sufficient HugePages are free on the local memory |
| 128 | + node. |
| 129 | +- _CNI:_ Changing the Container Networking Interface is out of scope for |
| 130 | + this proposal. However, this design should be extensible enough to |
| 131 | + accommodate network interface locality if the CNI adds support in the |
| 132 | + future. This limitation is potentially mitigated by the possibility to |
| 133 | + use the device plugin API as a stopgap solution for specialized |
| 134 | + networking requirements. |
| 135 | + |
| 136 | +## User Stories |
| 137 | + |
| 138 | +*Story 1: Fast virtualized network functions* |
| 139 | + |
| 140 | +A user asks for a "fast network" and automatically gets all the various |
| 141 | +pieces coordinated (hugepages, cpusets, network device) co-located on a |
| 142 | +socket. |
| 143 | + |
| 144 | +*Story 2: Accelerated neural network training* |
| 145 | + |
| 146 | +A user asks for an accelerator device and some number of exclusive CPUs |
| 147 | +in order to get the best training performance, due to socket-alignment of |
| 148 | +the assigned CPUs and devices. |
| 149 | + |
| 150 | +# Proposal |
| 151 | + |
| 152 | +*Main idea: Two phase topology coherence protocol* |
| 153 | + |
| 154 | +Topology affinity is tracked at the container level, similar to devices and |
| 155 | +CPU affinity. At pod admission time, a new component called the Topology |
| 156 | +Manager collects possible configurations from the Device Manager and the |
| 157 | +CPU Manager. The Topology Manager acts as an oracle for local alignment by |
| 158 | +those same components when they make concrete resource allocations. We |
| 159 | +expect the consulted components to use the inferred QoS class of each |
| 160 | +pod in order to prioritize the importance of fulfilling optimal locality. |
| 161 | + |
| 162 | +## Proposed Changes |
| 163 | + |
| 164 | +### New Component: Topology Manager |
| 165 | + |
| 166 | +This proposal is focused on a new component in the Kubelet called the |
| 167 | +Topology Manager. The Topology Manager implements the pod admit handler |
| 168 | +interface and participates in Kubelet pod admission. When the `Admit()` |
| 169 | +function is called, the Topology Manager collects topology hints from other |
| 170 | +Kubelet components. |
| 171 | + |
| 172 | +If the hints are not compatible, the Topology Manager may choose to |
| 173 | +reject the pod. Behavior in this case depends on a new Kubelet configuration |
| 174 | +value to choose the topology policy. The Topology Manager supports two |
| 175 | +modes: `strict` and `preferred` (default). In `strict` mode, the pod is |
| 176 | +rejected if alignment cannot be satisfied. The Topology Manager could |
| 177 | +use `softAdmitHandler` to keep the pod in `Pending` state. |
| 178 | + |
| 179 | +The Topology Manager component will be disabled behind a feature gate until |
| 180 | +graduation from alpha to beta. |
| 181 | + |
| 182 | +#### Computing Preferred Affinity |
| 183 | + |
| 184 | +A topology hint indicates a preference for some well-known local resources. |
| 185 | +Initially, the only supported reference resource is a mask of CPU socket IDs. |
| 186 | +After collecting hints from all providers, the Topology Manager chooses some |
| 187 | +mask that is present in all lists. Here is a sketch: |
| 188 | + |
| 189 | +1. Apply a partial order on each list: number of bits set in the |
| 190 | + mask, ascending. This biases the result to be more precise if |
| 191 | + possible. |
| 192 | +1. Iterate over the permutations of preference lists and compute |
| 193 | + bitwise-and over the masks in each permutation. |
| 194 | +1. Store the first non-empty result and break out early. |
| 195 | +1. If no non-empty result exists, return an error. |
| 196 | + |
| 197 | +The behavior when a match does not exist is configurable, as described |
| 198 | +above. |
| 199 | + |
| 200 | +#### New Interfaces |
| 201 | + |
| 202 | +```go |
| 203 | +package topologymanager |
| 204 | + |
| 205 | +// TopologyManager helps to coordinate local resource alignment |
| 206 | +// within the Kubelet. |
| 207 | +type Manager interface { |
| 208 | + lifecycle.PodAdmitHandler |
| 209 | + Store |
| 210 | + AddHintProvider(HintProvider) |
| 211 | + RemovePod(podName string) |
| 212 | +} |
| 213 | + |
| 214 | +// SocketMask is a bitmask-like type denoting a subset of available sockets. |
| 215 | +type SocketMask struct{} // TBD |
| 216 | + |
| 217 | +// TopologyHints encodes locality to local resources. |
| 218 | +type TopologyHints struct { |
| 219 | + Sockets []SocketMask |
| 220 | +} |
| 221 | + |
| 222 | +// HintStore manages state related to the Topology Manager. |
| 223 | +type Store interface { |
| 224 | + // GetAffinity returns the preferred affinity for the supplied |
| 225 | + // pod and container. |
| 226 | + GetAffinity(podName string, containerName string) TopologyHints |
| 227 | +} |
| 228 | + |
| 229 | +// HintProvider is implemented by Kubelet components that make |
| 230 | +// topology-related resource assignments. The Topology Manager consults each |
| 231 | +// hint provider at pod admission time. |
| 232 | +type HintProvider interface { |
| 233 | + // Returns hints if this hint provider has a preference; otherwise |
| 234 | + // returns `_, false` to indicate "don't care". |
| 235 | + GetTopologyHints(pod v1.Pod, containerName string) (TopologyHints, bool) |
| 236 | +} |
| 237 | +``` |
| 238 | + |
| 239 | +_Listing: Topology Manager and related interfaces (sketch)._ |
| 240 | + |
| 241 | + |
| 242 | + |
| 243 | +_Figure: Topology Manager components._ |
| 244 | + |
| 245 | + |
| 246 | + |
| 247 | +_Figure: Topology Manager instantiation and inclusion in pod admit lifecycle._ |
| 248 | + |
| 249 | +### Changes to Existing Components |
| 250 | + |
| 251 | +1. Kubelet consults Topology Manager for pod admission (discussed above.) |
| 252 | +1. Add two implementations of Topology Manager interface and a feature gate. |
| 253 | + 1. As much Topology Manager functionality as possible is stubbed when the |
| 254 | + feature gate is disabled. |
| 255 | + 1. Add a functional Topology Manager that queries hint providers in order |
| 256 | + to compute a preferred socket mask for each container. |
| 257 | +1. Add `GetTopologyHints()` method to CPU Manager. |
| 258 | + 1. CPU Manager static policy calls `GetAffinity()` method of |
| 259 | + Topology Manager when deciding CPU affinity. |
| 260 | +1. Add `GetTopologyHints()` method to Device Manager. |
| 261 | + 1. Add Socket ID to Device structure in the device plugin |
| 262 | + interface. Plugins should be able to determine the socket |
| 263 | + when enumerating supported devices. See the protocol diff below. |
| 264 | + 1. Device Manager calls `GetAffinity()` method of Topology Manager when |
| 265 | + deciding device allocation. |
| 266 | + |
| 267 | +```diff |
| 268 | +diff --git a/pkg/kubelet/apis/deviceplugin/v1beta1/api.proto b/pkg/kubelet/apis/deviceplugin/v1beta1/api.proto |
| 269 | +index efbd72c133..f86a1a5512 100644 |
| 270 | +--- a/pkg/kubelet/apis/deviceplugin/v1beta1/api.proto |
| 271 | ++++ b/pkg/kubelet/apis/deviceplugin/v1beta1/api.proto |
| 272 | +@@ -73,6 +73,10 @@ message ListAndWatchResponse { |
| 273 | + repeated Device devices = 1; |
| 274 | + } |
| 275 | + |
| 276 | ++message TopologyInfo { |
| 277 | ++ optional int32 socketID = 1 [default = -1]; |
| 278 | ++} |
| 279 | ++ |
| 280 | + /* E.g: |
| 281 | + * struct Device { |
| 282 | + * ID: "GPU-fef8089b-4820-abfc-e83e-94318197576e", |
| 283 | +@@ -85,6 +89,8 @@ message Device { |
| 284 | + string ID = 1; |
| 285 | + // Health of the device, can be healthy or unhealthy, see constants.go |
| 286 | + string health = 2; |
| 287 | ++ // Topology details of the device (optional.) |
| 288 | ++ optional TopologyInfo topology = 3; |
| 289 | + } |
| 290 | +``` |
| 291 | + |
| 292 | +_Listing: Amended device plugin gRPC protocol._ |
| 293 | + |
| 294 | + |
| 295 | + |
| 296 | +_Figure: Topology Manager hint provider registration._ |
| 297 | + |
| 298 | + |
| 299 | + |
| 300 | +_Figure: Topology Manager fetches affinity from hint providers._ |
| 301 | + |
| 302 | +# Graduation Criteria |
| 303 | + |
| 304 | +## Phase 1: Alpha (target v1.13) |
| 305 | + |
| 306 | +* Feature gate is disabled by default. |
| 307 | +* Alpha-level documentation. |
| 308 | +* Unit test coverage. |
| 309 | +* Node e2e tests. |
| 310 | +* CPU Manager allocation policy takes topology hints into account. |
| 311 | +* Device plugin interface includes socket ID. |
| 312 | +* Device Manager allocation policy takes topology hints into account. |
| 313 | + |
| 314 | +## Phase 2: Beta (later versions) |
| 315 | + |
| 316 | +* Feature gate is enabled by default. |
| 317 | +* Alpha-level documentation. |
| 318 | +* Support hugepages alignment. |
| 319 | +* User feedback. |
| 320 | + |
| 321 | +## GA (stable) |
| 322 | + |
| 323 | +* *TBD* |
| 324 | + |
| 325 | +# Challenges |
| 326 | + |
| 327 | +* Testing the Topology Manager in a continuous integration environment |
| 328 | + depends on cloud infrastructure to expose multi-node topologies |
| 329 | + to guest virtual machines. |
| 330 | +* Implementing the `GetHints()` interface may prove challenging. |
| 331 | + |
| 332 | +# Limitations |
| 333 | + |
| 334 | +* *TBD* |
| 335 | + |
| 336 | +# Alternatives |
| 337 | + |
| 338 | +* [AutoNUMA][numa-challenges]: This kernel feature affects memory |
| 339 | + allocation and thread scheduling, but does not address device locality. |
| 340 | + |
| 341 | +# References |
| 342 | + |
| 343 | +* *TBD* |
| 344 | + |
| 345 | +[k8s-issue-49964]: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/49964 |
| 346 | +[nfd-issue-84]: https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/node-feature-discovery/issues/84 |
| 347 | +[sriov-issue-10]: https://github.com/hustcat/sriov-cni/issues/10 |
| 348 | +[proposal-affinity]: https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/171 |
| 349 | +[numa-challenges]: https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2852078 |
0 commit comments