Bug 2172390

Yifat, what's your take on it?

I created a design doc https://docs.google.com/document/d/134raBlCMKZJvpUDV0zb2gBqSoa4aRuB2OZVp-LrG2yU/edit

@gouyang @yfrimanm 

Guys we have an issue. 
I have a template with 1 core, 2 sockets and 1 thread.
With this configuration we display just: 2 CPU as we multiply 1 x 2 x 1

In the Cpu Memory modal we edit just CPU CORES, so when I open the modal with this template, the core is 1.
If I increment to 2 Cores, the CPU at the end is 4: 2 x 2 x 1.


I think we are creating some confusion for the user at this point between Cores and CPU. What do you think?

My suggestion is to give the option to edit also sockets and threads in the modal and add a help icon with a popover that explain this multiplication as we do in other parts

(In reply to Ugo Palatucci from comment #3)
> @gouyang @yfrimanm 
> 
> Guys we have an issue. 
> I have a template with 1 core, 2 sockets and 1 thread.
> With this configuration we display just: 2 CPU as we multiply 1 x 2 x 1
> 
> In the Cpu Memory modal we edit just CPU CORES, so when I open the modal
> with this template, the core is 1.
> If I increment to 2 Cores, the CPU at the end is 4: 2 x 2 x 1.
> 
> 
> I think we are creating some confusion for the user at this point between
> Cores and CPU. What do you think?
> 
> My suggestion is to give the option to edit also sockets and threads in the
> modal and add a help icon with a popover that explain this multiplication as
> we do in other parts

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2087540#c7

This is what we've discussed last time, the solution is:
1. CPU number is cores * sockets * threads
2. A help text is added to explain how the CPU number is calculated
3. In the modal, it changes the CPU to core and only core is enabled for editing

To simplify the VM definition we agreed that the user should not be able to change the sockets or threads in the UI.
We should focus on the vCPU and the backend will decide how to split them to cores/sockets and threads.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2087540 saw about a similar issue and was resolved. We may need to see if it applies to this scenario as well

Please review the UX doc
https://docs.google.com/document/d/134raBlCMKZJvpUDV0zb2gBqSoa4aRuB2OZVp-LrG2yU/edit

> This is what we've discussed last time, the solution is:
> ...
> 2. A help text is added to explain how the CPU number is calculated
> ...

And where was the help text added to explain the CPU number calculations? I cannot see it anywhere implemented.
Or do we have some other design for that already? It isn't in the UX doc Yifat provided in the Comment 10.
Thanks.

Can we have something similar to the popover we have for CPU Mem in the VM Details page?
I mean add "?" next to the title with a popover saying:
CPUs = sockets X threads X cores.
This VirtualMachine currently has X sockets, X threads, and X cores.
WDYT?

(In reply to Yifat Menchik from comment #12)
> Can we have something similar to the popover we have for CPU Mem in the VM
> Details page?
> I mean add "?" next to the title with a popover saying:
> CPUs = sockets X threads X cores.
> This VirtualMachine currently has X sockets, X threads, and X cores.
> WDYT?

I think we should add a sentence referring to which value is edited in these fields. Like pop-over will be 
Cpus are determined by sockets X threads X cores.
This VirtualMachine currently has X sockets, X threads, and X cores.
Editing this field will change the cores quantity.

This is just a suggestion wdyt @yfrimanm , @rsdeor , @apinnick  ?

@mschatzm I believe this is what Yifat suggested. This is what we have now when changing the CPU/mem after the VM was created

Matan, Ronen, I've found we do already have something like that but IMO
'This VirtualMachine has {{sockets}} sockets, {{threads}} threads, and {{cores}} cores.'
is not applicable for template in catalog or for a VM that is just being created (Review
and create VirtualMachine page), because it would be misleading to the user ("which VM?
I haven't created any yet!"). I am not sure how to formulate such a sentence for each
specific case. I am leaving this as it is till we found some nice solution for that.

Hi Hilda, I think we can just change the sentence to say something like:
"'The VirtualMachine will have {{sockets}} sockets, ..."

Hi Yifat, Ronen,

I found that most of the existing help texts for CPU calculation are misleading/incorrect, except VM Details page,
because they say "This VirtualMachine..." when being on a Template Details.

This problem occurs for: VM Template, VMI, also when being on Review and create VirtualMachine page (customize VM).
I've better created a separate bug for that, where you can propose a solution:

PTAL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2196912

I also suggest adding missing help text for newly editable CPU | Memory field in the drawer within that new bug, not this one.
Maybe it would be good to use the sentence suggested in Comment 16 for that, maybe same also in Review and create VirtualMachine page,
as the VM is not really created yet in that stage of VM creation.

Thanks.

"I found that most of the existing help texts for CPU calculation are misleading/incorrect, except VM Details page, because they say "This VirtualMachine..." when being on a Template Details. >> I think that maybe we can change "This VirtualMachine..." to "The VirtualMachine created from this template will have...", but I think it requires docs review. @sjess please advise. 

"I also suggest adding missing help text for newly editable CPU | Memory field in the drawer within that new bug, not this one. Maybe it would be good to use the sentence suggested in Comment 16 for that, maybe same also in Review and create VirtualMachine page,
as the VM is not really created yet in that stage of VM creation." >> +1.

+1 on what Yifat said in comment 18.

I have some comments about the help text for CPU/memory:

1. The help text does not distinguish between singular and plural, so you will end up with mistakes like "This VirtualMachine has 2 sockets, 1 threads, and 1 cores." I'm not sure you can fix that at this point.
2. "X" in "sockets X threads X cores" looks weird. It would make more sense to use "sockets x threads x cores" or "sockets * threads * cores".
3. Re: VM that does not yet exist. I think the simplest solution is to use the future tense: "The VirtualMachine will have  ...", even though we do not often use the future tense in technical documentation. If you use the future tense, you do not need to say "... created from this template" because this is obvious from the context.

Some screenshots in the design doc have the label "CPUs cores". If this is current, please change to "CPU cores". "CPU" is an adjective modifying "cores". Adjectives do not have singular/plural forms.

Avital,

please add comments about help text to this BZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2196912 as it is related to help text itself. Thanks.

Only one small issue is the button "Restore template settings" is disabled in the modal when the template is create from default yaml, however, if click the customize button and proceed to VM overview tab, the button is enabled normally while open the CPU/Mem modal.

Hi Guohua,

I recommend to open a separate bug for this as it looks like a bug in the CPU/Memory modal component itself.
We use this component in more places of the UI, where "CPU | Memory" field occurs. I wasn't changing the component
when working on this feature. Thanks.

(In reply to Hilda Stastna from comment #23)
> Hi Guohua,
> 
> I recommend to open a separate bug for this as it looks like a bug in the
> CPU/Memory modal component itself.
> We use this component in more places of the UI, where "CPU | Memory" field
> occurs. I wasn't changing the component
> when working on this feature. Thanks.

Sounds fine, so move the bug to verified.

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory (Important: OpenShift Virtualization 4.14.0 Images security and bug fix update), and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2023:6817

The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 120 days