[FR] Multi-platform agent support

[namachieli]

Ran into a sort of a "no duh" issue today when trying to push a testrun to two agents on different architectures, easy enough to work around. I'm still in POC and most likely a production deployment will see use of the same agent hardware globally though, i do see a case where i want to run a VM in AWS to poke VPN portals.

I found 30 - Removing MakeFile and 83 - Agent on Network Equipment that seem related, but they mostly talk about this philosophically.

This also addresses that if you just follow the docs for deploying todd-server on say, Arch:x86_64, you end up with a todd-nativetestlet-ping testlet that pushed to potentially Arch:arm (rPi) agents.

I would think there are quite a few ways to implement something like this, both manually and automatically. I think both would require some shared logic to support.

Shared Logic (Some ideas, not exhaustive)

1. Assumption: We know the arch of client/server. How do we make sure Agents get the correct testlet?
   1. Use different buckets - /opt/server/assets/testlets/arch/[x64_86, arm, etc]
      • Only push testlets in the correct bucket
   2. Manage Testlet like a package you 'add' to ToDD.
      1. Add the requirement for testlets to have an output to the arg [arch]. When ToDD server registers a new testlet, it check for the output and tracks it.

Manual

• Configure architecture in agent.cfg and server.cfg as applicable to tell the server more about the agent.
• Include in group definition and require a given group criteria must all be same agent architecture
  • Probably not worth being this restrictive for the effort it takes to implement less restrictive methods

Automatic

• todd-agent startup include parsing hostnamectl (Great info about environment here)

I would love to hear more ideas.

[namachieli]

Workaround for now: change filenames for testlet bin and create groups around agent architecture referencing specifically named binaries. not great, but it works.

[Mierdin]

Thanks @namachieli! There are a few issues currently opened on this, so I'm consolidating under #83. I've copied your comment there.