[dpdk-ci] OBS pull request in pw-ci

[dpdk-ci] OBS pull request in pw-ci

[Juraj Linkeš]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1133 bytes --]

Hi folks,

I've submitted a PR with OBS changes to pw-ci: https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-ci/pull/12

I have a couple of points/questions:

*        The scripts are using https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:bluca:dpdk/dpdk to fork the debian and redhat spec and control files.

*        We should create a community OBS project (that the community can manage) where the forked packages will be created and where the build will run (OBS_TARGET_PROJECT in 3rd-party/dpdk/jenkins-rc)

o   The project should be configured according to what we want to build - distros/architectures. Can be done via OBS GUI.

*        Only after all patches have been submitted to a series branch does the DPDK Jenkins job upload and configure an OBS package. This means that we'll have a build just for the whole series, not for each patch. Not sure if this is a problem.

*        One thing that doesn't make sense to me is that the DPDK Jenkins job builds dpdk after each patch - is this needed, since Travis is going to do the same thing anyway?

*        I've added some more comments to the PR itself.

Regards,
Juraj

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7850 bytes --]

Re: [dpdk-ci] OBS pull request in pw-ci

[Aaron Conole]

Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:

> Hi folks,
>
>  
>
> I've submitted a PR with OBS changes to pw-ci: https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-ci/pull/12

Cool!  I'll take a look.  I was on PTO, so didn't get a chance yet.

>  
>
> I have a couple of points/questions:
>
> ·        The scripts are using https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:bluca:dpdk/dpdk to fork the debian and
> redhat spec and control files.

Okay.  A quick look shows that it's configurable, though.  Should be
okay.  I refer to:

https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-ci/pull/12/commits/93f6baa497c85d7aca36cda6661e90f7a69d4709#diff-e2ab32f32889186bdeb0ab4f0ef55282

> ·        We should create a community OBS project (that the community can manage) where the forked packages will be
> created and where the build will run (OBS_TARGET_PROJECT in 3rd-party/dpdk/jenkins-rc)

Okay.

> o   The project should be configured according to what we want to build - distros/architectures. Can be done via OBS GUI.
>
> ·        Only after all patches have been submitted to a series branch does the DPDK Jenkins job upload and configure an OBS
> package. This means that we'll have a build just for the whole series, not for each patch. Not sure if this is a problem.

The flip side is the amount of time to build.  We'd prefer to build just
one at a time.

> ·        One thing that doesn't make sense to me is that the DPDK Jenkins job builds dpdk after each patch - is this needed,
> since Travis is going to do the same thing anyway?

Travis doesn't.  The ovsrobot travis build is configured to cancel a
build on a branch if a new one comes.  That way we only build the
latest.  Builds on travis take 40+ min to complete, so if a 20-patch
series came in, we wouldn't be done building it for more than half a
day.  Then if a v2+ is posted in rapid succession, we lost all this
time.  So for now, we only build the absolute last patch in the series
on Travis.

Also, the build server we run the robot on doesn't do the builds anymore
because it also got overloaded - so meson and ninja are not the actual
meson/ninja but just dummy commands.  :-/  Maybe I should re-enable and
see if things improved.

> ·        I've added some more comments to the PR itself.
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
> Juraj

Re: [dpdk-ci] OBS pull request in pw-ci

[Juraj Linkeš]

Hi Aaron,

Have you had a chance to look at the pull request?

Thanks,
Juraj

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> Sent: Monday, July 6, 2020 7:32 PM
> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
> 
> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
> 
> > Hi folks,
> >
> >
> >
> > I've submitted a PR with OBS changes to pw-ci:
> > https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-ci/pull/12
> 
> Cool!  I'll take a look.  I was on PTO, so didn't get a chance yet.
> 
> >
> >
> > I have a couple of points/questions:
> >
> > ·        The scripts are using
> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:bluca:dpdk/dpdk to fork the
> debian and
> > redhat spec and control files.
> 
> Okay.  A quick look shows that it's configurable, though.  Should be okay.  I refer
> to:
> 
> https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-
> ci/pull/12/commits/93f6baa497c85d7aca36cda6661e90f7a69d4709#diff-
> e2ab32f32889186bdeb0ab4f0ef55282
> 
> > ·        We should create a community OBS project (that the community can
> manage) where the forked packages will be
> > created and where the build will run (OBS_TARGET_PROJECT in
> > 3rd-party/dpdk/jenkins-rc)
> 
> Okay.
> 
> > o   The project should be configured according to what we want to build -
> distros/architectures. Can be done via OBS GUI.
> >
> > ·        Only after all patches have been submitted to a series branch does the
> DPDK Jenkins job upload and configure an OBS
> > package. This means that we'll have a build just for the whole series, not for
> each patch. Not sure if this is a problem.
> 
> The flip side is the amount of time to build.  We'd prefer to build just one at a
> time.
> 
> > ·        One thing that doesn't make sense to me is that the DPDK Jenkins job
> builds dpdk after each patch - is this needed,
> > since Travis is going to do the same thing anyway?
> 
> Travis doesn't.  The ovsrobot travis build is configured to cancel a build on a
> branch if a new one comes.  That way we only build the latest.  Builds on travis
> take 40+ min to complete, so if a 20-patch series came in, we wouldn't be done
> building it for more than half a day.  Then if a v2+ is posted in rapid succession,
> we lost all this time.  So for now, we only build the absolute last patch in the
> series on Travis.
> 
> Also, the build server we run the robot on doesn't do the builds anymore
> because it also got overloaded - so meson and ninja are not the actual
> meson/ninja but just dummy commands.  :-/  Maybe I should re-enable and see
> if things improved.
> 
> > ·        I've added some more comments to the PR itself.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Juraj
> 

Re: [dpdk-ci] OBS pull request in pw-ci

[Aaron Conole]

Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:

> Hi Aaron,
>
> Have you had a chance to look at the pull request?

Only a bit.  I will do something more thorough on Wednesday.

> Thanks,
> Juraj
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>> Sent: Monday, July 6, 2020 7:32 PM
>> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
>> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
>> 
>> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
>> 
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I've submitted a PR with OBS changes to pw-ci:
>> > https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-ci/pull/12
>> 
>> Cool!  I'll take a look.  I was on PTO, so didn't get a chance yet.
>> 
>> >
>> >
>> > I have a couple of points/questions:
>> >
>> > ·        The scripts are using
>> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:bluca:dpdk/dpdk to fork the
>> debian and
>> > redhat spec and control files.
>> 
>> Okay.  A quick look shows that it's configurable, though.  Should be okay.  I refer
>> to:
>> 
>> https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-
>> ci/pull/12/commits/93f6baa497c85d7aca36cda6661e90f7a69d4709#diff-
>> e2ab32f32889186bdeb0ab4f0ef55282
>> 
>> > ·        We should create a community OBS project (that the community can
>> manage) where the forked packages will be
>> > created and where the build will run (OBS_TARGET_PROJECT in
>> > 3rd-party/dpdk/jenkins-rc)
>> 
>> Okay.
>> 
>> > o   The project should be configured according to what we want to build -
>> distros/architectures. Can be done via OBS GUI.
>> >
>> > ·        Only after all patches have been submitted to a series branch does the
>> DPDK Jenkins job upload and configure an OBS
>> > package. This means that we'll have a build just for the whole series, not for
>> each patch. Not sure if this is a problem.
>> 
>> The flip side is the amount of time to build.  We'd prefer to build just one at a
>> time.
>> 
>> > ·        One thing that doesn't make sense to me is that the DPDK Jenkins job
>> builds dpdk after each patch - is this needed,
>> > since Travis is going to do the same thing anyway?
>> 
>> Travis doesn't.  The ovsrobot travis build is configured to cancel a build on a
>> branch if a new one comes.  That way we only build the latest.  Builds on travis
>> take 40+ min to complete, so if a 20-patch series came in, we wouldn't be done
>> building it for more than half a day.  Then if a v2+ is posted in rapid succession,
>> we lost all this time.  So for now, we only build the absolute last patch in the
>> series on Travis.
>> 
>> Also, the build server we run the robot on doesn't do the builds anymore
>> because it also got overloaded - so meson and ninja are not the actual
>> meson/ninja but just dummy commands.  :-/  Maybe I should re-enable and see
>> if things improved.
>> 
>> > ·        I've added some more comments to the PR itself.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Juraj
>> 

Re: [dpdk-ci] OBS pull request in pw-ci

[Aaron Conole]

Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> writes:

> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
>
>> Hi Aaron,
>>
>> Have you had a chance to look at the pull request?
>
> Only a bit.  I will do something more thorough on Wednesday.

I looked through it and it seems okay.  I'll set it up to do a test run
tomorrow, and merge it once that goes well.

If the obs source project changes (right now, it's set to
home:bluca:dpdk) how should we update it?  Meaning, where does that
variable come from (and if the robot needs to provide one at some point
ever, how can we do that)?

>> Thanks,
>> Juraj
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>>> Sent: Monday, July 6, 2020 7:32 PM
>>> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
>>> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
>>> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
>>> 
>>> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
>>> 
>>> > Hi folks,
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I've submitted a PR with OBS changes to pw-ci:
>>> > https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-ci/pull/12
>>> 
>>> Cool!  I'll take a look.  I was on PTO, so didn't get a chance yet.
>>> 
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I have a couple of points/questions:
>>> >
>>> > ·        The scripts are using
>>> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:bluca:dpdk/dpdk to fork the
>>> debian and
>>> > redhat spec and control files.
>>> 
>>> Okay.  A quick look shows that it's configurable, though.  Should be okay.  I refer
>>> to:
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-
>>> ci/pull/12/commits/93f6baa497c85d7aca36cda6661e90f7a69d4709#diff-
>>> e2ab32f32889186bdeb0ab4f0ef55282
>>> 
>>> > ·        We should create a community OBS project (that the community can
>>> manage) where the forked packages will be
>>> > created and where the build will run (OBS_TARGET_PROJECT in
>>> > 3rd-party/dpdk/jenkins-rc)
>>> 
>>> Okay.
>>> 
>>> > o   The project should be configured according to what we want to build -
>>> distros/architectures. Can be done via OBS GUI.
>>> >
>>> > ·        Only after all patches have been submitted to a series branch does the
>>> DPDK Jenkins job upload and configure an OBS
>>> > package. This means that we'll have a build just for the whole series, not for
>>> each patch. Not sure if this is a problem.
>>> 
>>> The flip side is the amount of time to build.  We'd prefer to build just one at a
>>> time.
>>> 
>>> > ·        One thing that doesn't make sense to me is that the DPDK Jenkins job
>>> builds dpdk after each patch - is this needed,
>>> > since Travis is going to do the same thing anyway?
>>> 
>>> Travis doesn't.  The ovsrobot travis build is configured to cancel a build on a
>>> branch if a new one comes.  That way we only build the latest.  Builds on travis
>>> take 40+ min to complete, so if a 20-patch series came in, we wouldn't be done
>>> building it for more than half a day.  Then if a v2+ is posted in rapid succession,
>>> we lost all this time.  So for now, we only build the absolute last patch in the
>>> series on Travis.
>>> 
>>> Also, the build server we run the robot on doesn't do the builds anymore
>>> because it also got overloaded - so meson and ninja are not the actual
>>> meson/ninja but just dummy commands.  :-/  Maybe I should re-enable and see
>>> if things improved.
>>> 
>>> > ·        I've added some more comments to the PR itself.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> >
>>> > Juraj
>>> 

Re: [dpdk-ci] OBS pull request in pw-ci

[Juraj Linkeš]

Hi Aaron,

The dpdk community decided that the best place to maintaing the .spec and .control files would be in an OBS repository. Luca is currently doing that so that's where it comes from. As to how to update it - I included the exact string "home:bluca:dpdk" so that it's clear we want to use this repo, but it should be handled the same way as UPLOAD_GIT_REPO. I didn't see how this is supplied from the code in pw-ci, so I assumed it's something that's changed locally. I followed the same logic for OBS_SOURCE_PACKAGE and OBS_GIT_URL - the values that are there are what we should be using for our use case at this point in time.

I have a minor question about the pw-ci repo - is this your personal repo (i.e. not maintained by dpdk community)?

One last thing - we'll talk today about setting up a community OBS project (to mirror https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk - is this actually managed by the community?) in the CI call.

Thanks,
Juraj

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 9:14 PM
> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
> 
> Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
> >
> >> Hi Aaron,
> >>
> >> Have you had a chance to look at the pull request?
> >
> > Only a bit.  I will do something more thorough on Wednesday.
> 
> I looked through it and it seems okay.  I'll set it up to do a test run tomorrow,
> and merge it once that goes well.
> 
> If the obs source project changes (right now, it's set to
> home:bluca:dpdk) how should we update it?  Meaning, where does that variable
> come from (and if the robot needs to provide one at some point ever, how can
> we do that)?
> 
> >> Thanks,
> >> Juraj
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> >>> Sent: Monday, July 6, 2020 7:32 PM
> >>> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
> >>> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
> >>> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
> >>>
> >>> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
> >>>
> >>> > Hi folks,
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > I've submitted a PR with OBS changes to pw-ci:
> >>> > https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-ci/pull/12
> >>>
> >>> Cool!  I'll take a look.  I was on PTO, so didn't get a chance yet.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > I have a couple of points/questions:
> >>> >
> >>> > ·        The scripts are using
> >>> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:bluca:dpdk/dpdk to fork
> >>> the debian and
> >>> > redhat spec and control files.
> >>>
> >>> Okay.  A quick look shows that it's configurable, though.  Should be
> >>> okay.  I refer
> >>> to:
> >>>
> >>> https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-
> >>> ci/pull/12/commits/93f6baa497c85d7aca36cda6661e90f7a69d4709#diff-
> >>> e2ab32f32889186bdeb0ab4f0ef55282
> >>>
> >>> > ·        We should create a community OBS project (that the community can
> >>> manage) where the forked packages will be
> >>> > created and where the build will run (OBS_TARGET_PROJECT in
> >>> > 3rd-party/dpdk/jenkins-rc)
> >>>
> >>> Okay.
> >>>
> >>> > o   The project should be configured according to what we want to build -
> >>> distros/architectures. Can be done via OBS GUI.
> >>> >
> >>> > ·        Only after all patches have been submitted to a series branch does
> the
> >>> DPDK Jenkins job upload and configure an OBS
> >>> > package. This means that we'll have a build just for the whole
> >>> > series, not for
> >>> each patch. Not sure if this is a problem.
> >>>
> >>> The flip side is the amount of time to build.  We'd prefer to build
> >>> just one at a time.
> >>>
> >>> > ·        One thing that doesn't make sense to me is that the DPDK Jenkins job
> >>> builds dpdk after each patch - is this needed,
> >>> > since Travis is going to do the same thing anyway?
> >>>
> >>> Travis doesn't.  The ovsrobot travis build is configured to cancel a
> >>> build on a branch if a new one comes.  That way we only build the
> >>> latest.  Builds on travis take 40+ min to complete, so if a 20-patch
> >>> series came in, we wouldn't be done building it for more than half a
> >>> day.  Then if a v2+ is posted in rapid succession, we lost all this
> >>> time.  So for now, we only build the absolute last patch in the series on
> Travis.
> >>>
> >>> Also, the build server we run the robot on doesn't do the builds
> >>> anymore because it also got overloaded - so meson and ninja are not
> >>> the actual meson/ninja but just dummy commands.  :-/  Maybe I should
> >>> re-enable and see if things improved.
> >>>
> >>> > ·        I've added some more comments to the PR itself.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Regards,
> >>> >
> >>> > Juraj
> >>>
> 

Re: [dpdk-ci] OBS pull request in pw-ci

[Aaron Conole]

Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:

> Hi Aaron,
>
> The dpdk community decided that the best place to maintaing the .spec
> and .control files would be in an OBS repository. Luca is currently
> doing that so that's where it comes from. As to how to update it - I
> included the exact string "home:bluca:dpdk" so that it's clear we want
> to use this repo, but it should be handled the same way as
> UPLOAD_GIT_REPO. I didn't see how this is supplied from the code in
> pw-ci, so I assumed it's something that's changed locally. I followed
> the same logic for OBS_SOURCE_PACKAGE and OBS_GIT_URL - the values
> that are there are what we should be using for our use case at this
> point in time.
>
> I have a minor question about the pw-ci repo - is this your personal
> repo (i.e. not maintained by dpdk community)?

I maintain it - but it's publicly accessible / available.  I don't know
what else it means.

> One last thing - we'll talk today about setting up a community OBS
> project (to mirror https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk - is
> this actually managed by the community?) in the CI call.

Again, I maintain it - but it's for the community.  Actually the service
that runs the robot is a Red Hat server, but we choose to push it to a
public github and use a public CI so that it is all part of the
community.

I don't know what it means to be community maintained ;)

> Thanks,
> Juraj
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 9:14 PM
>> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
>> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
>> 
>> Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> writes:
>> 
>> > Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
>> >
>> >> Hi Aaron,
>> >>
>> >> Have you had a chance to look at the pull request?
>> >
>> > Only a bit.  I will do something more thorough on Wednesday.
>> 
>> I looked through it and it seems okay.  I'll set it up to do a test run tomorrow,
>> and merge it once that goes well.
>> 
>> If the obs source project changes (right now, it's set to
>> home:bluca:dpdk) how should we update it?  Meaning, where does that variable
>> come from (and if the robot needs to provide one at some point ever, how can
>> we do that)?
>> 
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Juraj
>> >>
>> >>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>> >>> Sent: Monday, July 6, 2020 7:32 PM
>> >>> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
>> >>> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
>> >>> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
>> >>>
>> >>> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
>> >>>
>> >>> > Hi folks,
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I've submitted a PR with OBS changes to pw-ci:
>> >>> > https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-ci/pull/12
>> >>>
>> >>> Cool!  I'll take a look.  I was on PTO, so didn't get a chance yet.
>> >>>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I have a couple of points/questions:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > ·        The scripts are using
>> >>> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:bluca:dpdk/dpdk to fork
>> >>> the debian and
>> >>> > redhat spec and control files.
>> >>>
>> >>> Okay.  A quick look shows that it's configurable, though.  Should be
>> >>> okay.  I refer
>> >>> to:
>> >>>
>> >>> https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-
>> >>> ci/pull/12/commits/93f6baa497c85d7aca36cda6661e90f7a69d4709#diff-
>> >>> e2ab32f32889186bdeb0ab4f0ef55282
>> >>>
>> >>> > ·        We should create a community OBS project (that the community can
>> >>> manage) where the forked packages will be
>> >>> > created and where the build will run (OBS_TARGET_PROJECT in
>> >>> > 3rd-party/dpdk/jenkins-rc)
>> >>>
>> >>> Okay.
>> >>>
>> >>> > o   The project should be configured according to what we want to build -
>> >>> distros/architectures. Can be done via OBS GUI.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > ·        Only after all patches have been submitted to a series branch does
>> the
>> >>> DPDK Jenkins job upload and configure an OBS
>> >>> > package. This means that we'll have a build just for the whole
>> >>> > series, not for
>> >>> each patch. Not sure if this is a problem.
>> >>>
>> >>> The flip side is the amount of time to build.  We'd prefer to build
>> >>> just one at a time.
>> >>>
>> >>> > ·        One thing that doesn't make sense to me is that the DPDK Jenkins job
>> >>> builds dpdk after each patch - is this needed,
>> >>> > since Travis is going to do the same thing anyway?
>> >>>
>> >>> Travis doesn't.  The ovsrobot travis build is configured to cancel a
>> >>> build on a branch if a new one comes.  That way we only build the
>> >>> latest.  Builds on travis take 40+ min to complete, so if a 20-patch
>> >>> series came in, we wouldn't be done building it for more than half a
>> >>> day.  Then if a v2+ is posted in rapid succession, we lost all this
>> >>> time.  So for now, we only build the absolute last patch in the series on
>> Travis.
>> >>>
>> >>> Also, the build server we run the robot on doesn't do the builds
>> >>> anymore because it also got overloaded - so meson and ninja are not
>> >>> the actual meson/ninja but just dummy commands.  :-/  Maybe I should
>> >>> re-enable and see if things improved.
>> >>>
>> >>> > ·        I've added some more comments to the PR itself.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Regards,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Juraj
>> >>>
>> 

Re: [dpdk-ci] OBS pull request in pw-ci

[Juraj Linkeš]

Hi Aaron,

By community maintained I meant that it's not solely on one person's shoulders - that is, if need be, someone else (from the community) would also be able to do the maintenance work.

Juraj

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 2:54 PM
> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
> 
> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
> 
> > Hi Aaron,
> >
> > The dpdk community decided that the best place to maintaing the .spec
> > and .control files would be in an OBS repository. Luca is currently
> > doing that so that's where it comes from. As to how to update it - I
> > included the exact string "home:bluca:dpdk" so that it's clear we want
> > to use this repo, but it should be handled the same way as
> > UPLOAD_GIT_REPO. I didn't see how this is supplied from the code in
> > pw-ci, so I assumed it's something that's changed locally. I followed
> > the same logic for OBS_SOURCE_PACKAGE and OBS_GIT_URL - the values
> > that are there are what we should be using for our use case at this
> > point in time.
> >
> > I have a minor question about the pw-ci repo - is this your personal
> > repo (i.e. not maintained by dpdk community)?
> 
> I maintain it - but it's publicly accessible / available.  I don't know what else it
> means.
> 
> > One last thing - we'll talk today about setting up a community OBS
> > project (to mirror https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk - is
> > this actually managed by the community?) in the CI call.
> 
> Again, I maintain it - but it's for the community.  Actually the service that runs
> the robot is a Red Hat server, but we choose to push it to a public github and use
> a public CI so that it is all part of the community.
> 
> I don't know what it means to be community maintained ;)
> 
> > Thanks,
> > Juraj
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 9:14 PM
> >> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
> >> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
> >> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
> >>
> >> Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi Aaron,
> >> >>
> >> >> Have you had a chance to look at the pull request?
> >> >
> >> > Only a bit.  I will do something more thorough on Wednesday.
> >>
> >> I looked through it and it seems okay.  I'll set it up to do a test
> >> run tomorrow, and merge it once that goes well.
> >>
> >> If the obs source project changes (right now, it's set to
> >> home:bluca:dpdk) how should we update it?  Meaning, where does that
> >> variable come from (and if the robot needs to provide one at some
> >> point ever, how can we do that)?
> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Juraj
> >> >>
> >> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >> >>> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> >> >>> Sent: Monday, July 6, 2020 7:32 PM
> >> >>> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
> >> >>> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
> >> >>> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > Hi folks,
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I've submitted a PR with OBS changes to pw-ci:
> >> >>> > https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-ci/pull/12
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Cool!  I'll take a look.  I was on PTO, so didn't get a chance yet.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I have a couple of points/questions:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > ·        The scripts are using
> >> >>> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:bluca:dpdk/dpdk to
> >> >>> fork the debian and
> >> >>> > redhat spec and control files.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Okay.  A quick look shows that it's configurable, though.  Should
> >> >>> be okay.  I refer
> >> >>> to:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-
> >> >>>
> ci/pull/12/commits/93f6baa497c85d7aca36cda6661e90f7a69d4709#diff-
> >> >>> e2ab32f32889186bdeb0ab4f0ef55282
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > ·        We should create a community OBS project (that the community
> can
> >> >>> manage) where the forked packages will be
> >> >>> > created and where the build will run (OBS_TARGET_PROJECT in
> >> >>> > 3rd-party/dpdk/jenkins-rc)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Okay.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > o   The project should be configured according to what we want to
> build -
> >> >>> distros/architectures. Can be done via OBS GUI.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > ·        Only after all patches have been submitted to a series branch does
> >> the
> >> >>> DPDK Jenkins job upload and configure an OBS
> >> >>> > package. This means that we'll have a build just for the whole
> >> >>> > series, not for
> >> >>> each patch. Not sure if this is a problem.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The flip side is the amount of time to build.  We'd prefer to
> >> >>> build just one at a time.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > ·        One thing that doesn't make sense to me is that the DPDK Jenkins
> job
> >> >>> builds dpdk after each patch - is this needed,
> >> >>> > since Travis is going to do the same thing anyway?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Travis doesn't.  The ovsrobot travis build is configured to
> >> >>> cancel a build on a branch if a new one comes.  That way we only
> >> >>> build the latest.  Builds on travis take 40+ min to complete, so
> >> >>> if a 20-patch series came in, we wouldn't be done building it for
> >> >>> more than half a day.  Then if a v2+ is posted in rapid
> >> >>> succession, we lost all this time.  So for now, we only build the
> >> >>> absolute last patch in the series on
> >> Travis.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Also, the build server we run the robot on doesn't do the builds
> >> >>> anymore because it also got overloaded - so meson and ninja are
> >> >>> not the actual meson/ninja but just dummy commands.  :-/  Maybe I
> >> >>> should re-enable and see if things improved.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > ·        I've added some more comments to the PR itself.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Regards,
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Juraj
> >> >>>
> >>
> 

Re: [dpdk-ci] OBS pull request in pw-ci

[Aaron Conole]

Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:

> Hi Aaron,
>
> By community maintained I meant that it's not solely on one person's
> shoulders - that is, if need be, someone else (from the community)
> would also be able to do the maintenance work.

Ahh - yes, David Marchand has access to those servers.

> Juraj
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 2:54 PM
>> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
>> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
>> 
>> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
>> 
>> > Hi Aaron,
>> >
>> > The dpdk community decided that the best place to maintaing the .spec
>> > and .control files would be in an OBS repository. Luca is currently
>> > doing that so that's where it comes from. As to how to update it - I
>> > included the exact string "home:bluca:dpdk" so that it's clear we want
>> > to use this repo, but it should be handled the same way as
>> > UPLOAD_GIT_REPO. I didn't see how this is supplied from the code in
>> > pw-ci, so I assumed it's something that's changed locally. I followed
>> > the same logic for OBS_SOURCE_PACKAGE and OBS_GIT_URL - the values
>> > that are there are what we should be using for our use case at this
>> > point in time.
>> >
>> > I have a minor question about the pw-ci repo - is this your personal
>> > repo (i.e. not maintained by dpdk community)?
>> 
>> I maintain it - but it's publicly accessible / available.  I don't know what else it
>> means.
>> 
>> > One last thing - we'll talk today about setting up a community OBS
>> > project (to mirror https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk - is
>> > this actually managed by the community?) in the CI call.
>> 
>> Again, I maintain it - but it's for the community.  Actually the service that runs
>> the robot is a Red Hat server, but we choose to push it to a public github and use
>> a public CI so that it is all part of the community.
>> 
>> I don't know what it means to be community maintained ;)
>> 
>> > Thanks,
>> > Juraj
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>> >> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 9:14 PM
>> >> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
>> >> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
>> >> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
>> >>
>> >> Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hi Aaron,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Have you had a chance to look at the pull request?
>> >> >
>> >> > Only a bit.  I will do something more thorough on Wednesday.
>> >>
>> >> I looked through it and it seems okay.  I'll set it up to do a test
>> >> run tomorrow, and merge it once that goes well.
>> >>
>> >> If the obs source project changes (right now, it's set to
>> >> home:bluca:dpdk) how should we update it?  Meaning, where does that
>> >> variable come from (and if the robot needs to provide one at some
>> >> point ever, how can we do that)?
>> >>
>> >> >> Thanks,
>> >> >> Juraj
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> -----Original Message-----
>> >> >>> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>> >> >>> Sent: Monday, July 6, 2020 7:32 PM
>> >> >>> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
>> >> >>> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
>> >> >>> Subject: Re: OBS pull request in pw-ci
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> writes:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> > Hi folks,
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > I've submitted a PR with OBS changes to pw-ci:
>> >> >>> > https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-ci/pull/12
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Cool!  I'll take a look.  I was on PTO, so didn't get a chance yet.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > I have a couple of points/questions:
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > ·        The scripts are using
>> >> >>> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:bluca:dpdk/dpdk to
>> >> >>> fork the debian and
>> >> >>> > redhat spec and control files.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Okay.  A quick look shows that it's configurable, though.  Should
>> >> >>> be okay.  I refer
>> >> >>> to:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> https://github.com/orgcandman/pw-
>> >> >>>
>> ci/pull/12/commits/93f6baa497c85d7aca36cda6661e90f7a69d4709#diff-
>> >> >>> e2ab32f32889186bdeb0ab4f0ef55282
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> > ·        We should create a community OBS project (that the community
>> can
>> >> >>> manage) where the forked packages will be
>> >> >>> > created and where the build will run (OBS_TARGET_PROJECT in
>> >> >>> > 3rd-party/dpdk/jenkins-rc)
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Okay.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> > o   The project should be configured according to what we want to
>> build -
>> >> >>> distros/architectures. Can be done via OBS GUI.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > ·        Only after all patches have been submitted to a series branch does
>> >> the
>> >> >>> DPDK Jenkins job upload and configure an OBS
>> >> >>> > package. This means that we'll have a build just for the whole
>> >> >>> > series, not for
>> >> >>> each patch. Not sure if this is a problem.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> The flip side is the amount of time to build.  We'd prefer to
>> >> >>> build just one at a time.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> > ·        One thing that doesn't make sense to me is that the DPDK Jenkins
>> job
>> >> >>> builds dpdk after each patch - is this needed,
>> >> >>> > since Travis is going to do the same thing anyway?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Travis doesn't.  The ovsrobot travis build is configured to
>> >> >>> cancel a build on a branch if a new one comes.  That way we only
>> >> >>> build the latest.  Builds on travis take 40+ min to complete, so
>> >> >>> if a 20-patch series came in, we wouldn't be done building it for
>> >> >>> more than half a day.  Then if a v2+ is posted in rapid
>> >> >>> succession, we lost all this time.  So for now, we only build the
>> >> >>> absolute last patch in the series on
>> >> Travis.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Also, the build server we run the robot on doesn't do the builds
>> >> >>> anymore because it also got overloaded - so meson and ninja are
>> >> >>> not the actual meson/ninja but just dummy commands.  :-/  Maybe I
>> >> >>> should re-enable and see if things improved.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> > ·        I've added some more comments to the PR itself.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > Regards,
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > Juraj
>> >> >>>
>> >>
>>