KATA-3270: pod overhead for peer pods reduce actual worker capacity

[balintTobik]

- Description of the problem which is fixed/What is the use case
Peer pods' overhead reduce actual worker capacity, however most of the RAM/CPU allocated in cloud instance.

Fixes: KATA-3270

- What I did

Operator create 'kata-remote' runtime class with a specific and lower overhead, like in upstream.

- How to verify it

1. create KataConfig for a peer pods
2. check 'kata-remote' runtime class created a lower overhead than 'kata' runtime class

- Description for the changelog
Use separate pod's overhead related constants for kata and peer pods.

[EDIT from Greg: adapted description to final version]

[openshift-ci-robot]

@balintTobik: This pull request references KATA-3270 which is a valid jira issue.

In response to this:

- Description of the problem which is fixed/What is the use case
Peer pods' overhead reduce actual worker capacity, however most of the RAM/CPU allocated in cloud instance.

Fixes: KATA-3270

- What I did
Operator create 'kata-remote' runtime class without overhead.

- How to verify it

1. create KataConfig for a peer pods
2. check 'kata-remote' runtime class created without overhead,
   'kata' runtime class still created with required overhead

- Description for the changelog
Remove peer pods' overhead related constants and create peerpod's runtime without overhead

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci]

Hi @balintTobik. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a openshift member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[gkurz]

Hi @balintTobik !

Thanks for working on that. I've commented and hopefully clarified what we want to achieved for now, i.e. use different overhead values for kata and kata-remote.

Also all commits should have a message and a valid Signed-off-by: tag.

Please address the comments in your local repo and force push to this PR.

[balintTobik]

Hi @gkurz!
Thank you for the review. I've updated the PR according to your comments.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@balintTobik: This pull request references KATA-3270 which is a valid jira issue.

In response to this:

- Description of the problem which is fixed/What is the use case
Peer pods' overhead reduce actual worker capacity, however most of the RAM/CPU allocated in cloud instance.

Fixes: KATA-3270

- What I did

Operator create 'kata-remote' runtime class with a specific and lower overhead, like in upstream.

- How to verify it

1. create KataConfig for a peer pods
2. check 'kata-remote' runtime class created a lower overhead than 'kata' runtime class

- Description for the changelog
Use separate pod's overhead related constants for kata and peer pods.

[EDIT from Greg: adapted description to final version]

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[gkurz]

Hi @balintTobik ! Thanks for this work.

I've pushed another commit on top of your PR that does some trivial polishing and suggests a description for your commit. I will squash at merge time.

Now we'll ask for some feedback from @vvoronko.

[openshift-ci]

@balintTobik: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[littlejawa]

/lgtm
Thanks!

[gkurz]

I should have squashed the patches at merge time but I forgot... never mind.