Summary
——-
The goal of this project was intended to have Eucalyptus cloud to
support ARM images so it allows Debian developers and users to be able
to use such facility for taks such package building, software
development (ie. Android) under a Debian pre-set image,
software testing many others.

What was expected to have at the end is a modified version of Eucalyptus
Cloud that supports ARM images on the first place. To date this goal has
been reached but is not complete, read production-ready. Extensive test
needs to be done. Besides that we have another goal which is to get
Debian community to use this new extended tool.

Project overview
—————-
Eucalyptus is a hybrid cloud computing platform which has a Open Source
(FLOSS) version. It’s targetted to be used for PaaS (Platform as a
Service), IaaS (Infrastructure as a Service) and other ‘distribution’
models. It can be used also for cloud management. Given that it has
implemented the EC2, for computing, and the S3, for storage, API, it’s
compatible with existing public clouds such Amazon EC2. Currently it
supports running i386 and amd64 images or NC (Node Controllers) in
Eucalyptus naming.

Eucalyptus is a complex piece of software. It’s architechture it’s
modular composed by five components. Cloud Controller (CLC), Walrus (W),
Storage Controller (SC), Cluster Controller (CC) and Node Controller
(NC). The first three are written in Java and the remaining are written
in C. Our project modifications was targetted to the NC component,
altough there is a remaining task for hacking the UI to allow setting
the arch of the uploaded NC image instance.

The Node Controller is in charge of setting the proper information for
Eucalyptus to be able to run virtualized images. Eucalyptus uses XEN and
KVM hyphervisor to handle internal virtualization subsystem, and
Libvirt, which is an abstraction of the existing virtualization
libraries, for program interfacing.

Having that in mind we are back to our project. For our project to be
sucessful we had various tasks to do. Beginning with understanding such
complex piece of software, followed by hacking the requiered bits and
later integrate the work so it results in a useful tool. Our approach to
the project was then inline with such description.

The project’s history
———————

I started my participation in GSoC approaching Steffen to discuss about
what was expected, or more accurately, what was in his mind. We
exchanged emails previous to my application and that resulted on my
application being submitted. From the beginning I should tell that I
wasn’t much clear on the ‘final product’ of the project, however we
refined ideas and goals during the weeks following to the official
begining of the project. What was clear for me, after all, is that for
this to ‘see the light’ and gain adoption Eucalyptus code needed to be
dealt with.

Our first task was review ARM image creation from scratch, using the
work done by Aurelien and Dominique in previous GSoC. I’ve managed to
get an updated ARM image running under qemu-system-arm. The issues
presented in the past were almost unexistant now that the versatile
kernel is official. You can see this on my first report.

After that being done and sometimes in parallel my main goal was then understand
the internals of the Eucalyptus software in order to figure out it’s
feasibility, where do we need to extend and how big the task is, we
didn’t knew upfront. From the beginning of the project Steffen was kind
to introduce me to the Eucalyptus developers and that have resulted in a
good outcome for Debian, IMHO, to date.

Understanding Eucalyptus internals was quite a fun task to say the less. As you
can see on the first part of the report Eucalyptus is modularized and
the component I was expected to work with was the NC (Node
Controller). Given that I isolated my work focus, I started to focus on
learning the internals about that component.

Node Controller as described is in charge of ‘talking’ with
virtualization hyphervisors in order to arrange things to run guest
image instances. The module has basically one main component: handler.c,
in charge to talk to the appropiate hyphervisor and there are
‘extensions’ (think of OOP polymorphism but acknoledge it’s plain C)
that interact with KVM or XEN.

I figured that if qemu-kvm is ran in Hyphervisor mode we can manage to
run an ARM image with qemu-system-arm. Given that Eucalyptus has
interaction with KVM hyphervisor in place, this answered the question of
the project’s feasibility. First green light on.
>From this point the scope reduced to interacting with the KVM handler
(node/handler_kvm.c) and extend it to support running an image that is
not amd64 or i386.

NC makes use of libvirt to abstract interaction with Hyphervisors. So,
the next phase was learning about it’s API and figure what’s needed to
be modified next. Libvirt uses a XML file for setting Domain (in
libvirt’s naming) definitions. So, Eucalyptus provides a Perl wrapper to
generate this file on runtime and allow the NC to invoke libvirt’s API
to run the instance. Next task then, was adapt such script to support
ARM arch. The current script is taiolred for amd64 and i383. I worked on
that front and managed to get a script prototype, that can later be
improved and support more arch’s.

Generating an adequate Libvirt’s XML Domain definition file for ARM can
be a heroic task. There are many things to have in mind given the
diversity of the ARM processor and vendors. I focused on the versatile
flavour given that I was going to test the image I built on the first
place and it ran fine under qemu-system-arm.
The Perl script wrapper then was adapted for such configuration and it
can be tested independently by issuing the following command:

$ tools/gen_kvm_libvirt_xml –arch arm

The –arch parameter is what I implemented and it’s intended to be
called from the kvm handler on instance creation. With the extensibility
in mind I’ve created a hash to associate the arch with their
corresponding emulator.

our %arches = (
‘amd64′ => ‘/usr/bin/kvm’,
‘arm’ => ‘/usr/bin/qemu-system-arm’,
);

Added the arch parameter to the GetOptions() function and used
conditions to tell whether the user is looking for a particular arch,
arm in our case. The most important parts to be considered are the
, and entries.

hvm

$local_kvm

There’s also and that require to be tailored for arm.

root=0800

As output the script generates an XML template that can be adapted to
your needs and it could be used and tested with tools like Libvirt’s
virsh. So that, it can be useful independently of Eucalyptus. I managed
to get to this point before the midterm evaluation.

Now that we had the XML wrapper almost done, the next task was to make
the handler call pass the arch as an argument to the script, so the
image is loaded with the proper settings and we are able to run it.

Eucalyptus doesn’t have a arch field for NC’s instances. So, after approaching
Eucalyptus developers, with whom we had already being interacting, I
settled to my proposal of extending the ncInstance struct with an arch
field (util/data.h). The ncInstance_t struct stores the metadata for the
instance being created. It’s used for storing runtime data as well as
network configuration and more. It was indeed the right place to add a
new field. I did so by creating the archId field.
Now I needed to make sure the arch information is stored and later used on the
libvirt’s call.

typedef struct ncInstance_t {
char instanceId[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
char imageId[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
char imageURL[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
char kernelId[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
char kernelURL[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
char ramdiskId[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
char ramdiskURL[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
char reservationId[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
char userId[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
char archId[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
int retries;

/* state as reported to CC & CLC */
char stateName[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE]; /* as string */
int stateCode; /* as int */

/* state as NC thinks of it */
instance_states state;

char keyName[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE*4];
char privateDnsName[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
char dnsName[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
int launchTime; // timestamp of RunInstances request arrival
int bootTime; // timestamp of STAGING->BOOTING transition
int terminationTime; // timestamp of when resources are released (->TEARDOWN transition)

virtualMachine params;
netConfig ncnet;
pthread_t tcb;

/* passed into NC via runInstances for safekeeping */
char userData[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE*10];
char launchIndex[CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
char groupNames[EUCA_MAX_GROUPS][CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE];
int groupNamesSize;

/* updated by NC upon Attach/DetachVolume */
ncVolume volumes[EUCA_MAX_VOLUMES];
int volumesSize;
} ncInstance;

With that in place what was left was modifying the functions that
store/update the ncInstance data, and also the libvirt’s function that
calls the gen_kvm_libvirt_xml script. I’ve modified the following files:
- util/data.c
- node/handlers_kvm.c
- node/handlers.{c,h}
- node/test.c
- node/client-marshall-adb.c

Most important the allocate_instance() function that is in charge of setting up
the instance metadata a prepare it to pass it to the handler, then
hyphervisor trough Libvirt’s API. The function now has a new archId
parameter as well, to keep coherence with the field name. It also
handles whether the field is set or not. We (Eucalyptus developers and
I) haven’t settled wether to initialize this field with a default value
or not. I’d stepped up and initialized with a NULL value for this string
type var.

if (archId != NULL){
strncpy(inst->archId, archId, CHAR_BUFFER_SIZE);
}

Stores the value only if it’s passed to the function. This is essential to
don’t break existing functionality and keep consistency for later releases.
With this we almost finished the part of extending Eucalyptus to support
arm images. It took quite long to get to that point. Next step: test.

As I mentioned in my previous report the current Eucalyptus packaging
has issues. From the beginning I’ve approached the pkg-eucalyptus team,
who were very hepful. So I myself set me up and joined the pkg team with
commit access to the repo. Even the GSoC is not intended for packaging
labour, I needed to clear things on that side because what we want is
adoption so anyone, say a DSA or a user, could setup a cloud that has
support for running arm instances under amd64 arch.

Over the weeks between mid-term evaluation and past week I’ve worked on
that front. Results were good, as you can see in the pkg-eucalyptus
mailing list and SVN repo.
Eucalyptus has a couple of issues that because of it’s nature and complexity
triggered build errors. Those issues came from the Java side of the project and
few form the C-side. The C-part was a problem with AXIS2 Jar used to generate
stubs for later inclusion on build-time. There’s no definitive solution to date
because one of the Makefile on gatherlog/Makefile issues a subshell call that
doesn’t catches the AXIS_HOME environment variable. I’ve worked around this
by defining it as a session env var from .zshrc. The other problem is related
to the Java libary versioning and most likely (we had to investigate further)
to groovy versioning.

As I explained Eucalyptus has 3 components written in Java. The Java code uses
extensively the AXIS2 library for implementing webservices calls, the groovy
language for JVM, and many other Java libaries. Eucalyptus open source version
ships both ‘online’ and ‘offline’ versions. The difference is basically that
the offline version ships the Java libaries JAR files inside the source code,
so you can build with all required deps.

Our former packaging used a file to list which Java libraries the package
depends on and it symlinked them using system wide installed packages. This
rather than helping out triggered a lot of problems I explaing with more detail
on the pkg-eucalyptus ml. I worked around this by telling the debian/rules
not to use such file to symlink and instead use the existing ones from
the source. The last weekend I managed to get to that point and built
sucessfully the software under Debian. I’ve done that in order to have a
complete build-cycle for my changes, and then test. In fact today I’ve
spotted and fixed a couple of bugs there.

What’s available now
——————–
To date we have a Eucalyptus branch where my patches are sent. The level of
extension is nearly complete, more testing needed. One missing bit is to
change the UI so that the user selects which arch her image is and that
value is passed to the corresponding functions on the Node Controller
component.

We also have an ARM image that can be tested and later automated. I’ve
recently learned about David Went’s VMBuilder repo that extends Ubuntu’s
vmbuilder to support image creationg. I might talk to him to adapt the tool
in order to support creation of arm images and use it to upload to an
Eucalyptus cloud.

I’ve also created a wiki page with different bits on which I was working on.
I’ve yet need to craft it to be more educational. I guess I’m going to use
this report as a source :)

We also had more strong cooperation with the Eucalyptus project and
involved their developers on the packaging and this project, which is
something I consider a great outcome for this project and GSoC goals:
to attract more people to contribute to FLOSS. I’ve also been contacted by
people from the Panda Project and we might cooperate also.

Future work
———–
I plan to keep working on the project regardless the GSoC ends. Our goal
as Debian could be integrating this into the Eucalyptus upstream
branch. We have good relations with them so expect news from that side.
I also plan to keep working with the Eucalyptus team and related
software in Debian, given that I’m familiarized with the tools and
projects.
I’m also planning to advocate SoC for Debian in my faculty. To date we
had already 4 students, IIRC, that have participated in the past.

Project challenges and lessons
——————————

During the project I faced many challenges both in the personal side
and in the technical one. This part is a bit personal but I expect we
learn from this.

First challenge was the ‘where do I sit’ problem. My project was
particular, indeed quite different from the others on it’s nature. I had
to work on a software that is not Debian’s and then come and say ‘Hey we
have this nice tool for you, come test it!’. So, indeed, my focus was on
the understanding of such tool, Eucalyptus, and not much on looking back
at Debian because I didn’t feel I had something to advertise yet and
indeed I got most valuable/useful feedback from Eucalyptus developers
rather than Debian’s, which for the case is OK IMHO. I had great
mentoring. This situation probably looked a bit of ‘isolation’ from my
side, from Debian’s POV, but it was not intended it’s just how it needed
to be IMHO. I felt that I wasn’t contributing directly to the
project. I’ve spoke about such thing with Steffen a couple of times. I’d
like to say that it was also my concern but I probably failed on
communicating this, second challenge.

Third challenge was more technical and related to the first one. Since I
was not writing any code for a Debian native package/program but instead for
other project I faced the situation of where to publish my
contributions. Eucalyptus had some issues on managing their FLOSS repo
and the current development one is outdated comparing to the
-src-offline 2.0.3 release. The project didn’t fit pkg-eucalyptus repo
neither, even we thought to branch the existing trunk and ship my
contribs as quilt patches, but it involved a lot of more work and burn
on reworking something that has issues now. Later on time I branched the
bzr eucalyptus-devel Launchpad repo and synced there with the
src-offline code. I was slow to react on thing I can say.

Fourth challenge was also technical and still dealing with. I was looking to
setup a machine to set a cloud and test my branch. The Dean of my faculty
kindly offered a machine but I’ve never managed to get things arranged
with the technical team. Steffen and I discussed about this and evaluated
options, at the end we settled on pushing adoption rather than showcasing it.
Since for adoption we need a use case, I’ve spend some SoC money on hardware
for doing this. I should have news this week on that side :)

Finally, I’d like to thank everyone on the Debian SoC team for this
opportunity to participate. I like to thank Steffen for his effort on
arranging things for me, Graziano from Eucalyptus for his advice on
working with the software code. The different people from Eucalyptus I
interacted with and showed interest on the project’s sucess. My
classmates and teachers from the Computer Science School at UCSP in
Arequipa-Peru, friends from the computing community in Peru – SPC and
finally my family. Thank you, I learned a lot, specially on the personal
side. As Randy Pausch put: “The brick walls are there to give us a
chance to show how badly we want something.”

Resources
———

Please see the Wiki page[1] for any reference to the project’s resources.

1- http://wiki.debian.org/SummerOfCode2011/BuildWithEucalyptus/ProjectLog

Best regards,
Rudy

The project’s goal is to be a useful resource for Debian developers and porters. I’ve joined some porters list in order to learn what are the things they are struggling with and how the project can help to address them. I’ll be starting a wiki page with such topics.

Bonding period:
Bonding period has been more fruitful than I expected. As mentioned in my previous post, Steffen and I got in touch with the Eucalyptus team, since they show their early interest on the project. We are coordinating cooperation between our teams. Besides my mentor and I defined to start working on the ARM image. Coordination went OK. We’ll be having meetings every two weeks.

Project Status:
Resuming Dominique’s work I began working on the ARM image. Aurélien’s work was a great resource. Currently I have a working and updated Debian testing ARM image using the versatile kernel that can be used under qemu-arm. I’m currently making tests and figuring out the next phase which is “cloudify” it. Over this weekend I expect to finish on that side and then began on the design and implementation of the tools that will be the project’s result.

Future plans:

week 3:

- Finish tests with the ARM image.

- Design the base tool-set, thinking integration with dpkg-buildpackage and qemubuilder.

week 4-8:

- Write the necessary code.

mid-term evaluation.

Other bits:

Latest days have been quite busy for me, since I’m still have to attend class, my semester ends in five weeks. This week was quite overwhelming with “media”, my University published an article (Spanish) about me and the program. I’m the third student of the CS school participating in GSoC, in the past we had Gentoo Project and KDE students. Later, a local Cable TV program interview me on the same matter, it went fine. I managed to talk about Debian and what we do (we get free Advertising yay!) :) also about Google’s Summer of Code program and invited students to participate both in FLOSS projects and the program. Still don’t know if they have put it on air, I think it will be next week.

People at Eucalyptus has been very helpful and willing to cooperate with us to make this project a success. We expect to get them involved on the packaging and probably as Debian contributors, if not developers, also. Next week is the official coding phase start, but I’ve been talking and working together with my mentor Steffen and the Eucalyptus people already. We’ll be starting working on the qemu ARM images, reusing and resuming the job did by Dominique Belhachemi in the past GSoC.

Of course I welcome as much feedback as you might find useful. I plan to post a project update every two weeks.

Debian’s social contract 4th item states:

Our priorities are our users and free software We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free software community. We will place their interests first in our priorities.

When we make decisions, either technical, legal and others regarding the operating system we deliver, this is one of the most referred argument. Altough that’s seen as high priority often we don’t have ways to properly know what our users want. While working on translations on the Spanish team we’ve faced this situation. Do our users find them useful? they are able to understand them? they find that a much familiar wording would be bette than high technical details? We didn’t know. Then, the question still exists.

Altough Debian has ways for users to provide feedback (BTS, mailing lists, IRC,  popcon, etc) none of them is designed to offer a way for the user to provide feedback on features, development roadmap and other non-bug aspects that developers and the project can tally and use for prioritize on releases. It’s rather amusing to note that one of the most valuable assets free software community has is user involvement and contribution.

But before we enter in details let’s start on the basics. For using this information we first need to know who our users are? do we? From my findings and interaction with the community I’ve identified two kinds of Debian users who can be clearly named.

1) The derivatives or pure blends, who use the Debian base and framework to build niche distributions.

2) The lead users (using E. Von Hippel’s definition), who are the developers, contributors and a group of users. Debian is, if not the only, one of the projects who is best for fostering lead users. Most of them at some point involve themselves in the development process and some, later become developers.

There is a more diverse group who are end-users but it’s unclear to me how we can group them. Despite that they probably represent the biggest part of the pie.

So, how we do please everyone? can we? In my opinion we can, at some degree. By implementing tools for first: gather user feedback, make statistical data, tally, we later can take informed decisions. In Debian decisions are voted and the set of people who votes are only developers with their own constraints.

I think this would ease the constant that release-decisions-regarding-foo-tech-legal-issue represented on each release iteration, saving time, health and bits.  It could be useful for knowing more about who are the ones we develop things for. I’m thinking of some sort of Dell’s IdeaStorm.com for software.

What do you think? I’m willing to co-mentor this if someone finds that is an interesting project for GSoC. Let me know!.

Hoy, el desarrollo que ha alcanzado el ecosistema de software libre ha permitido que cada vez más organizaciones, empresas, e instituciones adopten las soluciones de software creadas por éste. Por un lado, estudios recientes, como los de Gartner, señalan que para el 2012 gran parte de los productos comerciales de software emplearán componentes de software libre y que por lo menos una tercera parte del presupuesto de las empresas para software de aplicación se destinará a servicios de suscripción.

IDC said “Open Source is the most significant all-encompassing and long-term trend that the software industry has seen since the early 1980’s.”

Gartner predict that “ By 2012, 80 per cent of all commercial software will include elements of open-source technology. ”

A survey of nearly 1000 IT staff in the UK, Germany, France and North America, commissioned by Actuate, showed that fifty four percent of businesses in the UK felt that the benefits of open source outweighed any negative aspects

Another Gartners top predictions for 2008 is that “by 2012, at least one-third of business application software spending will be as a service subscription instead of as a product licence”.

Por otro lado, esto también presenta una situación en la que la demanda de profesionales con conocimiento de tecnologías de software libre se incrementa, mientras que la oferta parece ser cada vez más escasa, según demuestran estudios de Actuate.

Research conducted for Actuate found that six in every ten respondents said there “were serious problems finding the right IT skills to implement and manage open source solutions”

El pasado sábado 22, tuve la oportunidad de ofrecer una charla en mi universidad, la UPC, en la que desarrolle estos temas. El enfoque tenia como objetivo el saber cómo aprovechar, inteligentemente, como estudiantes de computación, las oportunidades y recursos que existen hoy para desarrollarnos profesionalmente haciendo lo que nos apasiona: software libre. En este sentido, conversamos acerca del programa Google Summer of Code como una manera de avanzar hacia tal objetivo, por los beneficios que ofrece a nivel académico y profesional. Además, presenté el proyecto OSS Watch, cuyo objetivo es fortalecer el vínculo entre la comunidad académica y la de software libre a través del desarrollo de material académico que introduzca prácticas de desarrollo de la comunidad en los cursos de computación. A través de esto el proyecto busca mejorar las capacidades de los futuros profesionales que les permitan desarrollar soluciones basadas en tecnologías de software libre.

La charla estuvo organizada por el grupo GNU UPC, conformado por alumnos y ex-alumnos de la universidad, que está en un proceso de reactivación de actividades y retomando proyectos a futuro, de los cuales seguro tendré algún grado de culpa. Las diapositivas de mi presentación están en el wiki que he creado para publicar mis trabajos academicos y proyectos personales.