feat(gateway): explain compute driver discovery decisions
Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.
Valutazione
- Difficoltà
- 4/5
- Tempo stimato
- 3-5 giorni
- Idoneità per principianti
- 55/100
- Tipo di issue
- Funzionalità
- Chiarezza
- Abbastanza chiara
- Stato di attività
- Attiva
- Stack tecnologico
- docker, rust
- Ambito
- backend, observability
Direzione di ricerca
Inizia dal percorso condiviso di rilevamento del socket API locale descritto nell’indagine, in cui i fallimenti delle probe HTTP sui socket Unix vengono ricondotti a un risultato non disponibile. Segui i percorsi relativi a metadati, connessione, scrittura, lettura, timeout e convalida della risposta, quindi usa risultati rappresentativi di successo, assenza e rifiuto per motivi di permessi per verificare le diagnosi per candidato, i riepiloghi di avvio concisi e la segnalazione sicura degli endpoint.
Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.
Descrizione
User Story
As an OpenShell operator, I want the gateway to explain how it selected or rejected local compute drivers, so that I can diagnose startup failures without reproducing them under a debugger.
Problem Statement
Gateway auto-detection probes local driver candidates, such as Docker Unix sockets, but silently treats probe failures as unavailable. When a candidate socket exists but Snap confinement denies access, the gateway eventually reports only that no suitable driver was found and systemd may restart it. Operators cannot tell which candidates were examined, whether a driver was selected, or whether a candidate failed because of a missing socket, an access denial, a timeout, or an unexpected API response.
Impact / Why This Matters
Package and confinement failures are difficult to distinguish from an absent runtime. The current workaround is to manually inspect socket paths, Snap interface connections, and journal output, then infer the cause. That is insufficient for CI and user installations because the decisive probe result is not recorded.
Proposed Design
When gateway driver auto-detection runs, expose diagnostics at debug level that identify each candidate driver and socket probe outcome without logging credentials or other sensitive data. Startup errors should provide a concise summary of the attempted drivers and why no usable driver was selected. A successful selection should state the selected driver and endpoint category in diagnostics.
Acceptance Criteria
- With debug logging enabled, each local compute-driver candidate records whether it was selected, skipped, or rejected.
- Docker socket diagnostics distinguish a missing/non-socket path, connection denial, timeout, and an incompatible or unsuccessful API response.
- Normal startup errors summarize the failed discovery decision without exposing secrets or request contents.
- A successful auto-detection records the selected driver and does not expose sensitive endpoint data.
- Coverage verifies representative successful, missing, and permission-denied probe outcomes.
Alternatives Considered
- Relying only on systemd or Snap logs: these do not report the gateway discovery decision or every candidate it attempted.
- Treating socket existence as availability: this would hide confinement failures and select unusable drivers.
- Requiring an explicitly configured driver: useful as a workaround, but does not make default installations diagnosable.
Agent Investigation
Docker discovery currently probes each candidate with a Unix-socket HTTP ping and returns only a boolean result. Failed metadata, connect, write, read, timeout, and response-validation paths are intentionally collapsed into unavailable. This behavior is shared by local API socket discovery and leaves no per-candidate diagnostic trail.
Related: https://github.com/NVIDIA/OpenShell/pull/2869#discussion_r3928619578
- Lingua principale
- Rust
- Stelle
- 8.7k
- Fork
- 1.3k
- Merge medio
- 2g 6h
- PR unite (30g)
- 297
Guida per i contributori
Apri la guida per i contributori
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Altre issue di NVIDIA/OpenShell
-
area:docs
Difficoltà 1/5 Meno di un'ora Idoneità per principianti 88/100
-
state:triage-needed
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 82/100
-
area:cli state:validated
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 72/100
-
state:triage-needed
Difficoltà 1/5 Meno di un'ora Idoneità per principianti 90/100
-
area:build spike state:review-ready state:stale
Difficoltà 2/5 Mezza giornata Idoneità per principianti 68/100
Tutte le issue di NVIDIA/OpenShell
Issue simili
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 75/100
-
state:needs triage
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 70/100
zed-industries/zed#64680 · 2 commenti ·
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 70/100
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 70/100
RustPython/RustPython#8802 ·
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 75/100
TheLarkInn/aipm#2390 ·