Skip to content

Added QAT configs with experimental flag.#442

Open
UtkarshBhatthere wants to merge 3 commits intocanonical:mainfrom
UtkarshBhatthere:feature/qat_enablement
Open

Added QAT configs with experimental flag.#442
UtkarshBhatthere wants to merge 3 commits intocanonical:mainfrom
UtkarshBhatthere:feature/qat_enablement

Conversation

@UtkarshBhatthere
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Added cluster configs for QAT enablement

Type of change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • CleanCode (Code refactor, test updates, does not introduce functional changes)
  • Documentation update (Doc only change)

How Has This Been Tested?

Manual Testing

Contributor's Checklist

Please check that you have:

  • self-reviewed the code in this PR.
  • added code comments, particularly in hard-to-understand areas.
  • updated the user documentation with corresponding changes.
  • added tests to verify effectiveness of this change.

@UtkarshBhatthere UtkarshBhatthere force-pushed the feature/qat_enablement branch 4 times, most recently from f92aff2 to 8e60795 Compare October 15, 2024 12:53
}

if config.Permission == ClusterConfigEXPRW {
return fmt.Errorf("WARNING: set operation on experimental config (%s)", c.Key)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would advise against doing this. The pattern if err != nil is way too common in Go, and overloading errors for warnings seems like a footgun to me. Instead, I would simply log the warnings here instead of down below.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's a temporary thing, because we don't want people to run QAT on prod until we're sure about it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The problem with logging is that the end user will not know about it until they check the logs. An acceptable (rather better) alternative is to require --experimental flag for such configs.

Signed-off-by: Utkarsh Bhatt <utkarsh.bhatt@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Utkarsh Bhatt <utkarsh.bhatt@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: utkarsh bhatt <utkarsh.bhatt@canonical.com>
@UtkarshBhatthere UtkarshBhatthere added the blocked Blocked due to some factor external to this PR/ Issue label Mar 18, 2025
@UtkarshBhatthere
Copy link
Contributor Author

Blocked as we do not have a the QAT changes in the distribution packages yet.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

blocked Blocked due to some factor external to this PR/ Issue

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants