add standard/portworx-labels host-label examples by aditya-kumar-ships-it · Pull Request #555 · Wind-River/cloud-platform-deployment-manager

aditya-kumar-ships-it · 2026-07-27T05:41:56Z

This change adds a new Deployment Manager example configuration demonstrating
declarative Portworx node-placement labels via HostProfile on a Standard 2+5
system with mixed worker roles (storage, storageless, and pure compute).

The example uses HostProfile.spec.labels to assign two Portworx-consumed labels:

px-node: "true" — shared gate for KMM px-fuse module loading
portworx.io/node-type: "storage" | "storageless" — PX storage role selector

Three worker profiles are defined:

px-storage-worker-profile (3 workers, inherits from worker-profile, adds PX labels)
px-storageless-worker-profile (1 worker, inherits from worker-profile, adds PX labels)
worker-profile (1 pure-compute worker, no Portworx)

This is a standalone example (not a Kustomize overlay on standard/default)
because it targets dynamically provisioned hosts via spec.match.bootMAC,
whereas the default base uses static provisioning via spec.overrides.bootMAC.

Files added:

examples/standard/portworx-labels/config.yaml
examples/standard/portworx-labels/kustomization.yaml
examples/standard/portworx-labels/README.md

Signed-off-by: Aditya Kumar aditya.kumar@windriver.com

Demonstrates Deployment Manager HostProfile labels for declarative Portworx node placement on a Standard 2+5 system with mixed worker roles (storage, storageless, and pure compute). Signed-off-by: Aditya Kumar <aditya.kumar@windriver.com>

yjian118 · 2026-07-27T14:17:39Z

+      ptpRole: none
+      uuid: ""
+    - class: platform
+      dataNetworks: []


expect to remove the none values from the interfaces, e.g.:

dataNetworks: []

maxRxRate: 0

maxTxRate: 0

ptpInterfaces: []

ptpRole: none

uuid: ""

it applies to all the interfaces in this file

Remove dataNetworks, maxRxRate, maxTxRate, ptpInterfaces, ptpRole, and uuid defaults from all interface definitions per review feedback. Signed-off-by: Aditya Kumar <aditya.kumar@windriver.com>

Signed-off-by: Aditya Kumar <aditya.kumar@windriver.com>

px-node is a custom label defined by us (not an official Portworx label). Using the portworx.io/ prefix implied it was an upstream Portworx label, which could cause confusion. Rename to the short-form 'px-node' in both px-storage-worker-profile and px-storageless-worker-profile. Signed-off-by: Aditya Kumar <aditya.kumar@windriver.com>

yjian118 · 2026-08-11T12:49:37Z

+  powerOn: true
+  provisioningMode: static
+  rootDevice: /dev/disk/by-path/pci-0000:00:1f.2-ata-1.0
+  storage:


Please remove the whole storage section as irrelevant to the new labels and specific to severs

yjian118 · 2026-08-11T12:50:06Z

+  powerOn: true
+  provisioningMode: static
+  rootDevice: /dev/disk/by-path/pci-0000:00:1f.2-ata-1.0
+  storage:


rchurch-wrs · 2026-08-11T17:57:35Z

+
+| Label | Purpose |
+|---|---|
+| `portworx.io/px-node: "true"` | Shared gate — KMM loads `px.ko` on any node with this label |


The README says portworx.io/px-node but config.yaml defines the label as just px-node (no portworx.io/ prefix). The PR description also says portworx.io/px-node.

Which is the actual label consumed by KMM?

If px-node → update README line 13, line 29, and PR description

If portworx.io/px-node → update config.yaml lines 289 and 397

As-is, a user following the README won't match what DM actually applies.

rchurch-wrs · 2026-08-11T17:58:12Z

+metadata:
+  labels:
+    controller-tools.k8s.io: "1.0"
+  name: controller-0


nit: The System CR name should describe the system/cluster, not a host. Existing examples use descriptive names (e.g., vbox). Consider something like portworx-standard or px-cluster to avoid confusion with the Host CR also named controller-0 on line 106.

rchurch-wrs · 2026-08-11T17:59:34Z

+  name: px-storage-worker-profile
+  namespace: deployment
+spec:
+  administrativeState: unlocked


Consider using base: worker-profile here instead of repeating the full spec. This is the pattern used by existing examples (e.g., controller-profile uses base: common-profile). The px-* profiles would reduce to just:

spec: base: worker-profile labels: px-node: "true" portworx.io/node-type: "storage"

This also naturally addresses @yjian118's request to remove the storage section — inherited fields come from the base, so only label-specific additions remain. The example then clearly demonstrates only the label feature.

rchurch-wrs · 2026-08-11T18:06:17Z

+  installOutput: graphical
+  interfaces:
+    ethernet:
+    - class: platform


px-storageless-worker-profile puts both mgmt and cluster-host on a single NIC (enp2s2), while worker-profile (line 164) and px-storage-worker-profile (line 278) split them across two NICs (enp2s2 + enp3s0).

Is this intentional for storageless nodes (fewer NICs needed since no storage traffic)? If so, a brief comment explaining why would help. If not, this may be a copy-paste issue.

rchurch-wrs · 2026-08-11T18:08:28Z

+This example demonstrates how to use Deployment Manager `HostProfile` labels
+to declaratively assign Portworx placement labels on a Standard system with
+mixed worker roles (storage, storageless, and pure compute).
+


Consider adding a Prerequisites section here noting the minimum topology:

2 controllers (HA)

3 storage workers (Portworx quorum minimum)

0+ storageless/pure-compute workers (optional)

Users who reduce storage workers below 3 will get a non-functional PX cluster with no obvious error. A one-line callout like:

Note: Portworx requires a minimum of 3 storage nodes for quorum.

...would save significant debugging time.

rchurch-wrs · 2026-08-11T18:15:48Z

+#   CONTROLLER0MAC, CONTROLLER1MAC, WORKER0MAC, WORKER1MAC, WORKER2MAC, WORKER3MAC, WORKER4MAC
+#   CHANGEME_BASE64 (base64-encoded admin password)
+#   OS_REGION_NAME value (from: system show | grep region_name)
+---


Broader question: every other examples/standard/* subdirectory is a Kustomize
overlay on standard/default. This example is standalone (~411 lines).

I see this uses spec.match.bootMAC with dynamic provisioning (DM discovers
existing hosts by MAC), while the existing standard/default base uses
spec.overrides.bootMAC with static provisioning (DM creates hosts with that MAC).

These are fundamentally different provisioning approaches, which makes overlaying
the existing base impractical.

Consider adding a brief note in the README explaining this is a standalone example (not an overlay on standard/default) because it targets dynamically provisioned hosts rather than statically provisioned ones.

OR align with the existing patterns

- Fix px-node label: use short-form 'px-node' in README (matches config.yaml) - Refactor px-* profiles to use base: worker-profile (removes spec duplication) - Remove storage sections from worker profiles (irrelevant to label example) - Remove storage section from System CR - Rename System CR from 'controller-0' to 'px-standard' - Fix NIC inconsistency: storageless profile now inherits 2-NIC split from base - Add Prerequisites section to README (3-node PX quorum requirement) - Add Standalone Example section explaining why this is not a Kustomize overlay Signed-off-by: Aditya Kumar <aditya.kumar@windriver.com>

aditya-kumar-ships-it added 2 commits July 27, 2026 11:02

Update README.md

a8ce344

wasnio requested review from wasnio and yjian118 July 27, 2026 13:57

yjian118 requested changes Jul 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

wasnio requested a review from enzocandotti July 27, 2026 14:29

aditya-kumar-ships-it added 2 commits July 28, 2026 12:20

fix: remove default none/zero/empty values from interfaces

15d0791

Remove dataNetworks, maxRxRate, maxTxRate, ptpInterfaces, ptpRole, and uuid defaults from all interface definitions per review feedback. Signed-off-by: Aditya Kumar <aditya.kumar@windriver.com>

fix: also remove platformNetworks: [] from lo interface override

a907325

Signed-off-by: Aditya Kumar <aditya.kumar@windriver.com>

aditya-kumar-ships-it requested a review from yjian118 July 29, 2026 09:57

aditya-kumar-ships-it force-pushed the master branch from 006e023 to 032a52b Compare July 31, 2026 16:51

yjian118 requested changes Aug 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

rchurch-wrs requested changes Aug 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

Navigation Menu

Uh oh!

add standard/portworx-labels host-label examples - #555

add standard/portworx-labels host-label examples#555
aditya-kumar-ships-it wants to merge 6 commits into
Wind-River:masterfrom
aditya-kumar-ships-it:master

aditya-kumar-ships-it commented Jul 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

yjian118 Jul 27, 2026

Uh oh!

yjian118 Aug 11, 2026

Uh oh!

yjian118 Aug 11, 2026

Uh oh!

rchurch-wrs Aug 11, 2026

Uh oh!

rchurch-wrs Aug 11, 2026

Uh oh!

rchurch-wrs Aug 11, 2026

Uh oh!

rchurch-wrs Aug 11, 2026

Uh oh!

rchurch-wrs Aug 11, 2026

Uh oh!

rchurch-wrs Aug 11, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

aditya-kumar-ships-it commented Jul 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

aditya-kumar-ships-it commented Jul 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading