Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove nvidia-container-cli #14009

Open
gabrielmougard opened this issue Aug 29, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Remove nvidia-container-cli #14009

gabrielmougard opened this issue Aug 29, 2024 · 1 comment
Labels
Improvement Improve to current situation
Milestone

Comments

@gabrielmougard
Copy link
Contributor

gabrielmougard commented Aug 29, 2024

With the introduction of #13562 , we can pass an NVIDIA GPU through a LXD container using a CDI notation. This approach unify the dGPU and the iGPU passthrough. Now, nvidia-container-cli is still shipped with LXD for traditional dGPU passthrough (using either a DRM card id or a GPU PCIe address), but is being deprecated by NVIDIA and no further development effort will be added to it. nvidia-container-cli needs to be removed. Here are some considerations:

  • We need to introduce a replacement tool to list the GPU resources of a host: currently, this is done with nvidia-container-cli info --csv and the results are exposed at GET 1.0/resources under the .gpu.cards field. Could we introduce a tool like deviceQuery (see here) that is listing resources as well AND which support dGPU and iGPU resource listing?
  • If we remove nvidia-container-cli, we no longer need to pass a PCIe address parameter when adding a GPU device since the detection logic is handled by an NVIDIA lib and not LXD: what are the implications in term of API breaking changes for the users? Shall we keep this device parameter and 'resolve' to a CDI identifier? Shall we remove this parameter completely?
@tomponline tomponline added the Improvement Improve to current situation label Aug 29, 2024
@tomponline tomponline added this to the soon milestone Aug 29, 2024
@tomponline
Copy link
Member

@mionaalex this would be a good potential roadmap item

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Improvement Improve to current situation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants