From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 428DB285C96 for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2025 20:13:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756411994; cv=none; b=Rzik4imoVfdZKfoipM0FWZj3e3QI+PoSuvKU0gzCY6c66xVnEUmuIAZNyQnVZqynzFmYAKm0Ht1S9InLsiJr8OZannFnGK/Oz4DR34j4K4pPFCFweyMDH13/KaA7YeIXjJv7J5SQoT6qd+xmC4Fcfo/+K9ffbJ4MLI3OXm0SKyM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756411994; c=relaxed/simple; bh=hPDrCfvVa9cTZXnrerczJHtvdtHh+7V6sLo0hiUJRKw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=LMxT1wQMbdEI1yGRk4HiPVmhjvkmw6qmQIkqRlFHvoOilxav0e6Pvh3/1RsEqkm7y/vl3OKd0O6UU/fsvjRo0++6Mv7PcgMt59UBAgXwiKK9FV5lSF113zAZJFB2I47DFuVq/1xiBAhcjKUv0sBayX+cXYo21su93T38rU5IDG0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=nMPhLQF1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="nMPhLQF1" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 89633C4CEF5; Thu, 28 Aug 2025 20:13:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1756411993; bh=hPDrCfvVa9cTZXnrerczJHtvdtHh+7V6sLo0hiUJRKw=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=nMPhLQF1/wmBHOdLw3mAId06fW+dq7eTUhPkHe3ZOy3ENrRYtBRM/RxyrpVyMkJ8M GgW9LbiFbYCwXHWfxvjeuKV5YOSW54RXVoonLzvz3DebYDzTD8I0mZpQGfSCPW/JbT UEo8bibEm9EBZOxkcvnRuM6MTtjQ43D92OqZmCGXZ5IK/iRYU9lrii5rVCwAvotOCt 2n1Fqzcp3+YwDwDUZfzOqNyru80scH9keR0tjoWQdbF6TI2QRZaRd1+VFs4N8N68yf +3UcaplYrfc/317qKUA4ck80HO3xOgD5cn5ggRcBlii47wFKuys5Nl0KMrJHiPvBtb CXqKD4TOUXhOA== Message-ID: Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2025 16:13:12 -0400 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kdevops@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] scripts: add Lambda Labs Python API library To: Luis Chamberlain Cc: Daniel Gomez , kdevops@lists.linux.dev References: <20250827212902.4021990-1-mcgrof@kernel.org> <20250827212902.4021990-3-mcgrof@kernel.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Chuck Lever Organization: kernel.org In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 8/28/25 4:03 PM, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 04:00:09PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: >> On 8/28/25 3:33 PM, Luis Chamberlain wrote: >>> On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 02:59:18PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: >>>> On 8/27/25 5:28 PM, Luis Chamberlain wrote: >>>>> Add a Python library for interacting with the Lambda Labs cloud API. >>>>> This provides core functionality to query instance types, regions, >>>>> availability, and manage cloud resources programmatically. >>>>> >>>>> The API library handles: >>>>> - Instance type enumeration and capacity checking >>>>> - Region availability queries >>>>> - SSH key management operations >>>>> - Error handling and retries for API calls >>>>> - Parsing and normalizing API responses >>>>> >>>>> This forms the foundation for dynamic Kconfig generation and terraform >>>>> integration, but doesn't enable any features yet. >>>> >>>> Thanks for splitting this up. Much much easier for humble humans to >>>> understand now. There are some really interesting ideas in the series; >>>> kudos to you and Claude. >>>> >>>> The other cloud providers have their own house-brewed command line >>>> utilities that are typically packaged by distributions (eg, oci, aws, >>>> and so on), as well as their own Ansible collections. >>>> >>>> I assume that Lambda does not have those (yet). >>> >>> Right. It sad to not see such a thing, which meant it was actually >>> harder to do this inference work, and yet it shows its possible. Which >>> also means, technically in theory, it might even be possible to do the >>> same with other cloud providers without a CLI tool. >>> >>>> Can the patch >>>> description mention that? >>> >>> Sure. >>> >>>> Basically that's the whole purpose for this >>>> patch and the two following, IIUC. >>>> >>>> I would actually encourage this script to be restructured and renamed so >>>> that it works like the tooling available from other cloud providers. >>> >>> So you mean we write Lambda's CLI tool? Sure we can try that, but who do >>> we follow? And do we need to do that now? Or can I do that later? >>> >>>> Separate the API calls and retrieval of information (which is rather >>>> general purpose) from the translation of that information to Kconfig >>>> menus (which is specific to kdevops). >>> >>> You mean, to re-use all the knowledge we used for Kconfig dynamic >>> kconfig to a create a specific tool, which can then be itself leveraged >>> for both the dynamic kconfig and also a user tool? >> >> I think so: Write a command line tool that makes API queries and spits >> out JSON. Write a second tool that takes the JSON and turns it into >> Kconfig menus. Re-use the first tool for other tasks. That is how I >> was thinking of building dynamic menus for the other providers; their >> existing command line tools are tool #1 above. > > Yeah I think this is really *it*! > >> But, we can do it later. I won't hold you up with crazy ideas. > > Its not crazy at all, proper architecture trumps all. But if we didn't > start evaluating this patch series with this inference cloud thing for > dynamic kconfig thing we wouldn't have ended up here. And so I think we > have a solid path. > > I'd like to extend your suggestion further: I am not sure if we need a > different CLI tool per cloud provider. Wouldn't it be nice if we had > unified way to query such things and output json for each cloud > provider? Basically I'm re-using the tools each provider gives us because, well, I'm a lazy sod. It gives some immediate traction. But I can see that doing it that way means we have a distinct JSON to Kconfig translation for each provider. If handling the API queries is as easy as the Python script here looks, then the only hard part to building a single tool will be turning the provider-specific JSON into something common (and YAML output might be easier for Ansible and Python to deal with than JSON, IMO). -- Chuck Lever