oxidecomputer / oxidecomputer/propolis
more devices could have lifecycle::Indicator
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 270
- Forks
- 42
- Avg merge
- 4d 5h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 6
Description
as of #754 we've got a struct Indicator that explicitly tracks the current state w.r.t. the device Lifecycle state machine, and comes with some logic to ensure that state transitions are valid.
I don't have a specific design in mind yet, but Indicator relies on Lifecycle implementers calling its functions at the right points in their implementations of the trait. it feels like Indicator is a good check that drivers of devices (propolis-server, propolis-standalone) are conforming to the state machine, and that really we could have an Indicator on every device. then it might be plausible to not require manually calling Indicator::start etc to keep its tracking of the lifecycle state in sync?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading #754 and the existing struct Indicator and Lifecycle implementations. Trace how propolis-server and propolis-standalone call the lifecycle functions, then determine a design for placing an Indicator on every device without manual synchronization. Done should mean the design is agreed and device lifecycle tracking remains valid across those implementations.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- operating-systems
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100