Re: [dpdk-ci] Master compilation failures in Intel CI

Re: [dpdk-ci] Master compilation failures in Intel CI

[Thomas Monjalon]

14/01/2020 08:18, Chen, Zhaoyan:
> - most of the patches in patchset are aimed to specific PMD driver, 
>    but just several patches for makefile/build script/config file(common files).. in patchset. 
>    (e.g. https://patchwork.dpdk.org/patch/64384/)
>    This kind of patchset will be pointed to dpdk master

We should filter out config/, mk/ and MAINTAINERS in the decision.


> - one patchset includes document change and other specific PMD driver change. 
>   This kind of patchset will be pointed to dpdk master

For doc/, we must make sure each part of the doc is well sorted
in MAINTAINERS so we can distinguish crypto and ethdev docs for instance.


> For these 2 situations, basically, next-* branches are ahead of master, 
> developers expected their patches could be tested on next-*, since that is code base under developing. 
> 
> So applying these kinds of patchsets to next-* are more meaningful for them.

I agree.

Re: [dpdk-ci] Master compilation failures in Intel CI

[David Marchand]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 9:04 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
>
> 14/01/2020 08:18, Chen, Zhaoyan:
> > - most of the patches in patchset are aimed to specific PMD driver,
> >    but just several patches for makefile/build script/config file(common files).. in patchset.
> >    (e.g. https://patchwork.dpdk.org/patch/64384/)
> >    This kind of patchset will be pointed to dpdk master

The problem with this patch is that it changes the MAINTAINERS file itself.
The "guess" script works on the origin/master version of the file, not
after the patch is applied.
So the script will point at dpdk master anyway for the patch you
mentioned, since drivers/common are currently going through master.

I'd say those situations are rare and we must look carefully to set
the subtree when adding a new component.

>
> We should filter out config/, mk/ and MAINTAINERS in the decision.

I prepared a change for this.

>
>
> > - one patchset includes document change and other specific PMD driver change.
> >   This kind of patchset will be pointed to dpdk master
>
> For doc/, we must make sure each part of the doc is well sorted
> in MAINTAINERS so we can distinguish crypto and ethdev docs for instance.

The doc/ pattern is currently filtered out, if this is what you are
referring to.


> > For these 2 situations, basically, next-* branches are ahead of master,
> > developers expected their patches could be tested on next-*, since that is code base under developing.
> >
> > So applying these kinds of patchsets to next-* are more meaningful for them.
>
> I agree.

I sent an update on MAINTAINERS, and I am about to send the change
that filters mk/, config/ and MAINTAINERS.

Can you give me a list of patchsets you think are problematic so that
I can test them?
Thanks.


-- 
David Marchand

Re: [dpdk-ci] Master compilation failures in Intel CI

[Thomas Monjalon]

14/01/2020 10:51, David Marchand:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 9:04 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> > 14/01/2020 08:18, Chen, Zhaoyan:
> > > - one patchset includes document change and other specific PMD driver change.
> > >   This kind of patchset will be pointed to dpdk master
> >
> > For doc/, we must make sure each part of the doc is well sorted
> > in MAINTAINERS so we can distinguish crypto and ethdev docs for instance.
> 
> The doc/ pattern is currently filtered out, if this is what you are
> referring to.

I think the doc/ directory should be not filtered out,
because patches which are updating only the doc of a driver or a tool
need to be directed to the right tree/maintainer.

However some basic doc files may need to be filtered out.
Examples:
	doc/api/
	doc/guides/conf.py

We should also filter out .gitignore

Re: [dpdk-ci] Master compilation failures in Intel CI

[David Marchand]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 11:33 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
>
> 14/01/2020 10:51, David Marchand:
> > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 9:04 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> > > 14/01/2020 08:18, Chen, Zhaoyan:
> > > > - one patchset includes document change and other specific PMD driver change.
> > > >   This kind of patchset will be pointed to dpdk master
> > >
> > > For doc/, we must make sure each part of the doc is well sorted
> > > in MAINTAINERS so we can distinguish crypto and ethdev docs for instance.
> >
> > The doc/ pattern is currently filtered out, if this is what you are
> > referring to.
>
> I think the doc/ directory should be not filtered out,
> because patches which are updating only the doc of a driver or a tool
> need to be directed to the right tree/maintainer.

I mean the doc/ (hungry) pattern, not the directory, is filtered out:
https://git.dpdk.org/tools/dpdk-ci/tree/tools/guess_git_tree.py#n173


>
> However some basic doc files may need to be filtered out.
> Examples:
>         doc/api/
>         doc/guides/conf.py

For documentation, there seems to be a lot of special cases.
Not clear to me, if you want to do it, go ahead.


> We should also filter out .gitignore

Ok, I can add it to my patch.


-- 
David Marchand

Re: [dpdk-ci] Master compilation failures in Intel CI

[Zhang, XuemingX]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2325 bytes --]

++ Viacheslav Ovsiienko && Pablo de Lara && Xiaoyu && Wei Hu && Dekel Peled && Bernard Iremonger



On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 11:33 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net<mailto:thomas@monjalon.net>> wrote:

>

> 14/01/2020 10:51, David Marchand:

> > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 9:04 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net<mailto:thomas@monjalon.net>> wrote:

> > > 14/01/2020 08:18, Chen, Zhaoyan:

> > > > - one patchset includes document change and other specific PMD driver change.

> > > >   This kind of patchset will be pointed to dpdk master

> > >

> > > For doc/, we must make sure each part of the doc is well sorted in

> > > MAINTAINERS so we can distinguish crypto and ethdev docs for instance.

> >

> > The doc/ pattern is currently filtered out, if this is what you are

> > referring to.

>

> I think the doc/ directory should be not filtered out, because patches

> which are updating only the doc of a driver or a tool need to be

> directed to the right tree/maintainer.

>

>I sent an update on MAINTAINERS, and I am about to send the change

>that filters mk/, config/ and MAINTAINERS.

>

>Can you give me a list of patchsets you think are problematic so

>that I can test them?



Filter some recent patch sets and list problematic patchsets.



In the table below, which branch does it make more sense to apply the patchsets? Old_guess_tree or new_guess_tree or next-**?

Please fill in the form guess_tree column.


serite_id

old_guess_tree

new_guess_tree

serite_url

Author

guess_tree

8174

dpdk-next-net-mlx

dpdk

http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8174

Viacheslav Ovsiienko



8158

dpdk-next-crypto

dpdk

http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8158

Pablo de Lara



8154

dpdk-next-net

dpdk

http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8154

Xiaoyu Min



8153

dpdk-next-net

dpdk

http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8153

Wei Hu (Xavier)



8177

dpdk-next-net-mlx

dpdk

http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8177

Dekel Peled



8162

dpdk-next-net

dpdk

http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8162

Bernard Iremonger



8169

dpdk-next-net-intel

dpdk

http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8169

Bernard Iremonger






thanks

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 19819 bytes --]

Re: [dpdk-ci] Master compilation failures in Intel CI

[Dekel Peled]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5183 bytes --]

PSB.

From: Zhang, XuemingX <xuemingx.zhang@intel.com>
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2020 8:07 AM
To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>; Jack Min <jackmin@mellanox.com>; huwei013@chinasoftinc.com; Dekel Peled <dekelp@mellanox.com>; Iremonger, Bernard <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
Cc: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>; Xu, Qian Q <qian.q.xu@intel.com>; Mcnamara, John <john.mcnamara@intel.com>; Yu, PingX <pingx.yu@intel.com>; Ali Alnubani <alialnu@mellanox.com>; David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>; Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Chen, Zhaoyan <zhaoyan.chen@intel.com>; ci@dpdk.org
Subject: RE: Master compilation failures in Intel CI


++ Viacheslav Ovsiienko && Pablo de Lara && Xiaoyu && Wei Hu && Dekel Peled && Bernard Iremonger



On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 11:33 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net<mailto:thomas@monjalon.net>> wrote:

>

> 14/01/2020 10:51, David Marchand:

> > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 9:04 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net<mailto:thomas@monjalon.net>> wrote:

> > > 14/01/2020 08:18, Chen, Zhaoyan:

> > > > - one patchset includes document change and other specific PMD driver change.

> > > >   This kind of patchset will be pointed to dpdk master

> > >

> > > For doc/, we must make sure each part of the doc is well sorted in

> > > MAINTAINERS so we can distinguish crypto and ethdev docs for instance.

> >

> > The doc/ pattern is currently filtered out, if this is what you are

> > referring to.

>

> I think the doc/ directory should be not filtered out, because patches

> which are updating only the doc of a driver or a tool need to be

> directed to the right tree/maintainer.

>

>I sent an update on MAINTAINERS, and I am about to send the change

>that filters mk/, config/ and MAINTAINERS.

>

>Can you give me a list of patchsets you think are problematic so

>that I can test them?



Filter some recent patch sets and list problematic patchsets.



In the table below, which branch does it make more sense to apply the patchsets? Old_guess_tree or new_guess_tree or next-**?

Please fill in the form guess_tree column.


serite_id
old_guess_tree
new_guess_tree
serite_url
Author
guess_tree
8174
dpdk-next-net-mlx
dpdk
http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8174<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatchwork.dpdk.org%2Fapi%2Fseries%2F8174&data=02%7C01%7Cdekelp%40mellanox.com%7Cdd7d269a099f425e507a08d79b137298%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C637148380167709933&sdata=yk8C8a6q4UpaxwyFIpA%2BCevKbH64aIq5C%2FvSBrRh9x4%3D&reserved=0>
Viacheslav Ovsiienko

8158
dpdk-next-crypto
dpdk
http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8158<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatchwork.dpdk.org%2Fapi%2Fseries%2F8158&data=02%7C01%7Cdekelp%40mellanox.com%7Cdd7d269a099f425e507a08d79b137298%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C637148380167719929&sdata=sAvntGUa55sKRUihCxyiYXulfZrNGcCifl0uO4t2E%2BI%3D&reserved=0>
Pablo de Lara

8154
dpdk-next-net
dpdk
http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8154<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatchwork.dpdk.org%2Fapi%2Fseries%2F8154&data=02%7C01%7Cdekelp%40mellanox.com%7Cdd7d269a099f425e507a08d79b137298%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C637148380167719929&sdata=bZUS6J4Hmx71FDnVrwNtx5GuVgiWCxN37Zkzj5HV5%2FU%3D&reserved=0>
Xiaoyu Min

8153
dpdk-next-net
dpdk
http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8153<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatchwork.dpdk.org%2Fapi%2Fseries%2F8153&data=02%7C01%7Cdekelp%40mellanox.com%7Cdd7d269a099f425e507a08d79b137298%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C637148380167729923&sdata=fmtkM%2FZP2ogDNEDK4gqfzRQsy9JWvCU6sVKE006eshc%3D&reserved=0>
Wei Hu (Xavier)

8177
dpdk-next-net-mlx
dpdk
http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8177<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatchwork.dpdk.org%2Fapi%2Fseries%2F8177&data=02%7C01%7Cdekelp%40mellanox.com%7Cdd7d269a099f425e507a08d79b137298%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C637148380167729923&sdata=SmpFekAkE1aJFsanU3LEtip91SWD4sESEVSxBrwboXc%3D&reserved=0>
Dekel Peled
 next-net-mlx
8162
dpdk-next-net
dpdk
http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8162<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatchwork.dpdk.org%2Fapi%2Fseries%2F8162&data=02%7C01%7Cdekelp%40mellanox.com%7Cdd7d269a099f425e507a08d79b137298%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C637148380167729923&sdata=NSjF2zpHhBL4It5OkYooGZLb4EEbU0A26aVwhrPZwB4%3D&reserved=0>
Bernard Iremonger

8169
dpdk-next-net-intel
dpdk
http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8169<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatchwork.dpdk.org%2Fapi%2Fseries%2F8169&data=02%7C01%7Cdekelp%40mellanox.com%7Cdd7d269a099f425e507a08d79b137298%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C637148380167739913&sdata=bD8stoNL1KN6VQUkPOGuIOQ%2B3IB13iFb%2FjqYyBrbxCM%3D&reserved=0>
Bernard Iremonger




thanks

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 23329 bytes --]

Re: [dpdk-ci] Master compilation failures in Intel CI

[David Marchand]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2403 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 7:06 AM Zhang, XuemingX <xuemingx.zhang@intel.com>
wrote:

> >Can you give me a list of patchsets you think are problematic so
>
> >that I can test them?
>
>
>
> Filter some recent patch sets and list problematic patchsets.
>
>
>
> In the table below, which branch does it make more sense to apply the
> patchsets? Old_guess_tree or new_guess_tree or next-**?
>
> Please fill in the form guess_tree column.
>

Please, don't use html for a simple list.


>
> serite_id
>
> old_guess_tree
>
> new_guess_tree
>
> serite_url
>
> Author
>
> guess_tree
>
> 8174
>
> dpdk-next-net-mlx
>
> dpdk
>
> *http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8174
> <http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8174>*
>
> Viacheslav Ovsiienko
>
>
>
> 8158
>
> dpdk-next-crypto
>
> dpdk
>
> *http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8158
> <http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8158>*
>
> Pablo de Lara
>
>
>
> 8154
>
> dpdk-next-net
>
> dpdk
>
> *http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8154
> <http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8154>*
>
> Xiaoyu Min
>
>
>
> 8153
>
> dpdk-next-net
>
> dpdk
>
> *http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8153
> <http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8153>*
>
> Wei Hu (Xavier)
>
>
>
> 8177
>
> dpdk-next-net-mlx
>
> dpdk
>
> *http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8177
> <http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8177>*
>
> Dekel Peled
>
>
>
> 8162
>
> dpdk-next-net
>
> dpdk
>
> *http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8162
> <http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8162>*
>
> Bernard Iremonger
>
>
>
> 8169
>
> dpdk-next-net-intel
>
> dpdk
>
> *http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8169
> <http://patchwork.dpdk.org/api/series/8169>*
>
> Bernard Iremonger
>
>
>
>
>

I am ok with reverting the change on the script, but, once done some fixes
are needed in MAINTAINERS:

- 8174 should go to the main repository, since there are mbuf changes, but
mbuf is not marked to go to the main repository, to be fixed,
- 8158 touches a devtools/ script, but I suppose Thomsa and I will see this
kind of change, we can leave it in MAINTAINERS as it is,
- 8154 is ok as it is,
- 8153 is ok as it is,
- 8177 is ok too,
- 8162 and others from Bernard are not a proper series, must be resent as a
series, but I can see Ferruh already took it,



-- 
David Marchand

>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 18343 bytes --]