Veenadhari Bedida

Hi @eero-t, tried limitrange. supports extended resources. It does not accept pods with `gpu.intel.com/i915 > 1`. `Warning FailedCreate 2m55s job-controller Error creating: pods "intel-dgpu-clinfo-gphs2" is forbidden: maximum gpu.intel.com/i915 usage per...

Yes, added min limit. It still adds request and limit i915 resource to non-GPU pods. I understand its cause of the default limit and default request, is that right? Irrespective...

If default values are added to limitrange it is added to non GPU pods. If no default values are added to limit range, it allocates below values to non GPU...

Yes works as expected. If default is` gpu.intel.com/i915: 0` it shows the same for non GPU pods

With max and min in limitrange, for GPU pods requesting resource > 1, it has a forbidden error. If default values are not added in limirange, it ends up adding...

Also, as limitrange is namespace scoped- we only add it in the namespace where workloads are deployed right?

Got it, thanks. > I.e. does it just look funny, but work fine in practice? Apart from this, can we assume limitrange as an efficient solution? Then we could add...

For openshift, there might be some roles to not deploy workloads/objects in `"openshift-"` namespaces created during the cluster. Will check

On openshift these namespaces: `default, kube-system, kube-public, openshift-node, openshift-infra, openshift` do not allow assigning SCC, so its recommended not deploy pods in these namespaces

Any other possible solutions you would suggest to try apart from limitrange?