feat(lxd): add s390x virtio-ports detection for LXD #6597

blackboxsw · 2025-12-02T22:06:45Z

I have signed the CLA: https://ubuntu.com/legal/contributors
I have included a comprehensive commit message using the guide below
I have added unit tests to cover the new behavior under tests/unittests/
- Test files should map to source files i.e. a source file cloudinit/example.py should be tested by tests/unittests/test_example.py
- Run unit tests with tox -e py3
I have kept the change small, avoiding unnecessary whitespace or non-functional changes.
I have added a reference to issues that this PR relates to in the PR message (Refs integration: do not LXD bind mount /etc/cloud/cloud.cfg.d #1234, Fixes integration: do not LXD bind mount /etc/cloud/cloud.cfg.d #1234)
I have updated the documentation with the changed behavior.
- If the change doesn't change the user interface and is trivial, this step may be skipped.
- Cloud-config documentation is generated from the jsonschema.
- Generate docs with tox -e doc.

Proposed Commit Message

feat(lxd): add s390x virtio-ports detection for LXD

Support LXD detection on IBM's s390x architecture using virtio-ports
serial device detection. Add a new detection method which checks
LXD serial devices in /sys/class/virtio-ports/ for both current
(com.canonical.lxd) and legacy (org.linuxcontainers.lxd) names.
Update public LXD datasource documentation for this detection method.

Drop the now unnecessary DMI board name check from ds-identify and
DataSourceLXD because virtio-ports is sufficient for both KVM/QEMU
and s390x.

The following mechinisms for LXD detection are retained:
1. /dev/lxd/sock socket file (primary method)
2. virtio-ports serial device presence if socket is not yet active

Implements: PL073

Additional Context

Test Steps

git checkout upstream/ubuntu/questing -B ubuntu/questing
new_upstream_snapshot -c 5ff9034ffdac4a59a871384c1bd082c2589a1c4e
build-package
sbuild ....
CLOUD_INIT_OS_IMAGE=questing CLOUD_INIT_CLOUD_INIT_SOURCE=cloud-init_25.4~2gdef5afa3-0ubuntu1_all.deb CLOUD_INIT_PLATFORM=lxd_vm .tox/integration-tests/bin/pytest tests/integration_tests/datasources/test_lxd_discovery.py::test_lxd_kvm_datasource_discovery_without_lxd_socket

Merge type

Squash merge using "Proposed Commit Message"
Rebase and merge unique commits. Requires commit messages per-commit each referencing the pull request number (#<PR_NUM>)

blackboxsw · 2025-12-02T22:07:03Z

Additionally, we should add resolute support to pycloudlib per canonical/pycloudlib#494

holmanb

Thanks for this @blackboxsw, this is a good start. I left some comments inline, also note that the commit message:

Drop the now unnecessary DMI board name check from ds-identify and
DataSourceLXD because virtio-ports is sufficient in bot KVM/QEMU and
s390x.

The following mechinisms for LXD detection are retained:
1. /dev/lxd/sock socket file (primary method)
2. virtio-ports serial device (KVM/QEMU and new for s390x)

This reads as if s390x is a new platform alternative to QEMU, when in fact it is a different cpu instruction set (like x86_64 or amd64).

cloudinit/sources/DataSourceLXD.py

tools/ds-identify

Support LXD detection on IBM's s390x architecture using virtio-ports serial device detection. Add a new detection method that checks for LXD serial devices in /sys/class/virtio-ports/ for both current (com.canonical.lxd) and legacy (org.linuxcontainers.lxd) names. Update public LXD datasource documentation for this detection method. Drop the now unnecessary DMI board name check from ds-identify and DataSourceLXD because virtio-ports is sufficient in bot KVM/QEMU and non-x86_64 platforms without DMI information. The following mechinisms for LXD detection are retained: 1. /dev/lxd/sock socket file (primary method) 2. virtio-ports serial device presence if socket file isn't yet present Implements: PL073

blackboxsw

Thank you for the review @holmanb. I think I have resolved all comments.

cloudinit/sources/DataSourceLXD.py

tools/ds-identify

holmanb

It looks like we still have a failing ruff check.

holmanb

Thanks for the work on this @blackboxsw. See my comments.

cloudinit/sources/DataSourceLXD.py

tools/ds-identify

cloudinit/sources/DataSourceLXD.py

tests/unittests/test_ds_identify.py

holmanb

Hey @blackboxsw, I think this is getting closer. See my latest round of comments.

tests/integration_tests/datasources/test_lxd_discovery.py

tests/unittests/test_ds_identify.py

tools/ds-identify

tests/unittests/test_ds_identify.py

github-actions · 2026-01-04T00:34:50Z

Hello! Thank you for this proposed change to cloud-init. This pull request is now marked as stale as it has not seen any activity in 14 days. If no activity occurs within the next 7 days, this pull request will automatically close.

If you are waiting for code review and you are seeing this message, apologies! Please reply, tagging blackboxsw, and he will ensure that someone takes a look soon.

(If the pull request is closed and you would like to continue working on it, please do tag blackboxsw to reopen it.)

- comment fixes in tests and code paths regarding lxd socket file. - fix integration test behavior to validate ds-identify discovery of lxd despite security.devlxd set False - fix unit tests to drop trailing newline

blackboxsw

Thank you Brett. I believe I have addressed all review comments now.

tests/unittests/test_ds_identify.py

holmanb

Thanks for the changes @blackboxsw. Besides the linter failures it looks like there were also a couple of comments from before that weren't addressed.

tests/integration_tests/datasources/test_lxd_discovery.py

holmanb · 2026-01-06T14:43:02Z

tests/integration_tests/datasources/test_lxd_discovery.py

+        # Expect fallback to NoCloud because python DataSourceLXD cannot
+        # get any information from /dev/lxd/sock due to security.devlxd above.
+        cloud_id = client.execute("cloud-id").stdout
+        if "nocloud" != cloud_id:
+            raise AssertionError(
+                "cloud-init did not discover 'nocloud' datasource."
+                f" Found '{cloud_id}'"
+            )


This tests a specific failure mode that occurs when the socket is disabled, which is more of a test of the platform than of cloud-init, isn't it? This doesn't actually "Test DataSourceLXD on KVM detected by ds-identify using virtio-ports."

If the LXD project stopped providing the nocloud device then this test would start to fail unexpectedly due to changes in an external project. Checking for nocloud here could provide a "canary signal" to warn that something is broken on the platform, but the signal getting to the right place would mean work for the developers to look at failing integration tests and doing something about the failure. But if this is known and expected by LXD developers then what is the point?

My comment was maybe misleading here or didn't provide enough relevant context.

I've updated the comment to:

+ # Expect NoCloud because python DataSourceLXD cannot read metadata from + # /dev/lxd/sock due to security.devlxd above and falls back to + # the nocloud seed files written by _customize_environment. cloud_id = client.execute("cloud-id").stdout

I understand what is happening. I'm saying I don't necessarily think that this is important behavior for us to test. Is the fact that NoCloud is detected when the socket is not available a core feature of cloud-init? Or is this just a failure mode that happens to still resemble success simply because that is how LXD originally exposed the IMDS?

My comment earlier was about the test maintenance burden this kind of test will have introduced if the LXD project later stops providing 2 duplicate datasources. I don't want to have to come back later and rewrite this test when the LXD project decides that they will no longer provide duplicate datasources.

tests/integration_tests/datasources/test_lxd_discovery.py

tests/integration_tests/releases.py

holmanb · 2026-01-06T14:46:36Z

tests/unittests/test_ds_identify.py

        },
-        # /dev/lxd/sock does not exist and KVM virt-type
-        "mocks": [{"name": "is_socket_file", "ret": 1}, MOCK_VIRT_IS_KVM],
+        "mocks": [{"name": "is_socket_file", "ret": 1}, MOCK_VIRT_IS_KVM_QEMU],


forget to push?

tests/unittests/test_ds_identify.py

blackboxsw · 2026-01-06T20:56:40Z

Thank you for this additional round @holmanb. Getting nearer to the finish line here and avoiding stray test changes that are unrelated to this PR.

github-actions bot added the documentation This Pull Request changes documentation label Dec 2, 2025

blackboxsw requested a review from holmanb December 3, 2025 03:58

blackboxsw force-pushed the pl073-s390x-lxd branch 3 times, most recently from fe83d28 to 413e95b Compare December 3, 2025 04:04

holmanb reviewed Dec 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

blackboxsw added 2 commits December 12, 2025 10:01

review: no cat in ds-id, comment fixes, OSError synonymou with IOError

8ba2087

blackboxsw commented Dec 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

cloudinit/sources/DataSourceLXD.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

cloudinit/sources/DataSourceLXD.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

tools/ds-identify Show resolved Hide resolved

tools/ds-identify Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

test: missing import

cff1ba6

blackboxsw force-pushed the pl073-s390x-lxd branch from 413e95b to cff1ba6 Compare December 12, 2025 17:42

blackboxsw added 2 commits December 12, 2025 10:47

ruff

4feb5e7

review comments: retain kvm/qemu check gating virtio-port traversal

5cde6c5

blackboxsw requested a review from holmanb December 17, 2025 19:43

holmanb reviewed Dec 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

review comments: reduce nesting with early exits, ruff and revert test

44d8143

blackboxsw requested a review from holmanb December 19, 2025 17:34

chore: drop python DSLXD changes since we depend on presence of a socket

61029f4

holmanb reviewed Dec 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

github-actions bot added the stale-pr Pull request is stale; will be auto-closed soon label Jan 4, 2026

holmanb removed the stale-pr Pull request is stale; will be auto-closed soon label Jan 5, 2026

holmanb self-assigned this Jan 5, 2026

blackboxsw force-pushed the pl073-s390x-lxd branch 3 times, most recently from 67190b4 to df409f7 Compare January 5, 2026 22:25

review comments: ds-identify integration test fix, comment updates

a993eba

- comment fixes in tests and code paths regarding lxd socket file. - fix integration test behavior to validate ds-identify discovery of lxd despite security.devlxd set False - fix unit tests to drop trailing newline

blackboxsw force-pushed the pl073-s390x-lxd branch from df409f7 to 35c274a Compare January 5, 2026 22:29

blackboxsw commented Jan 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

tests/unittests/test_ds_identify.py Show resolved Hide resolved

tests/unittests/test_ds_identify.py Show resolved Hide resolved

blackboxsw requested a review from holmanb January 5, 2026 22:33

test: adjust remaining mocks for non-MAAS and azure platform tests

042e234

blackboxsw force-pushed the pl073-s390x-lxd branch from 35c274a to 042e234 Compare January 5, 2026 22:34

ruff/black

4cb6751

holmanb reviewed Jan 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

blackboxsw added 2 commits January 6, 2026 13:50

test: use yaml.safe_load for ds-identify asserts, comment updates

3e869c3

tests: revert stray MOCK_VIRT_IS_KVM_QEMU test

bb68992

blackboxsw requested a review from holmanb January 6, 2026 20:55

feat(lxd): add s390x virtio-ports detection for LXD #6597

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat(lxd): add s390x virtio-ports detection for LXD #6597

Conversation

blackboxsw commented Dec 2, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Proposed Commit Message

Additional Context

Test Steps

Merge type

Uh oh!

blackboxsw commented Dec 2, 2025

Uh oh!

holmanb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

blackboxsw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

holmanb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

holmanb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

holmanb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 4, 2026

Uh oh!

blackboxsw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

holmanb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

holmanb Jan 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

blackboxsw Jan 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

holmanb Jan 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

blackboxsw commented Dec 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

blackboxsw commented Jan 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading