From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3479F43CE5; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:05:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F726410ED; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:05:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-yb1-f182.google.com (mail-yb1-f182.google.com [209.85.219.182]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FF7140041 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:04:52 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-yb1-f182.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-dc74e33fe1bso5195463276.0 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 14:04:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; t=1710882291; x=1711487091; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=lRuen4iVbVnmQVi1/cOQOwEevcn0wv1zlFg83Muu8tY=; b=Wtss7e+t5eS0f7T3rVGDmpuxYvd2pyExkpVyQYkOwKv6Z7xqTD6eXfZmdtCqzRiLne idnoI8Gn5hlB9mJXfAs80iMf+nCy+Il4m70PbjdS55ULWsGXkuaQD4xxwblBt3j2gmOR oNvi85wtFcOdYrieJcdvKrb5iklPIHaL4tnDY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1710882291; x=1711487091; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=lRuen4iVbVnmQVi1/cOQOwEevcn0wv1zlFg83Muu8tY=; b=MLMrZSBVFB5NeO3Hy/b+05l4qg+3avdkOvHzAPQCm+S+quMmsXdEeSZnYHslXitMfA XSAe+O1RUOa+Ev6KzDOPXMp+Zk5MVMMtt1l5M5BYEnK0fNTIWFapGqh/RPS0tI6+2zAV v90XGedCmjiFYjwx+zuG/rqlAQNGHJi92xIkVjw+bchwCrZtfRGud3ACnawBKsRi4qld ro+Oq86ZXGARtkjxT2GInLvTv5AuXgqRK2ej2/kIFWjGLvbyW0WPAQM6AXyDObf8+cfV 1IEXMKMcO297fltd640ZALiZOg36/OT7n3t3dQwvKwpc/LdXwGqUQR4C0IFigwlMuS1t V1sw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy/626hxRI8ggdd5XbJgeV57F8b8AOV5L8dKDl4Bvlxz4u/+wLW O7ulOTISZ62fMcrlUMEtSKFfmS0kanL/AU1xcZVScAT+fJ13E2fgQ9YFF5dtMVLWpZC+RbdGaqW tkp9xAk6yWIWHbmCTHrtX+Tsbrlw/r9PvPLmJAA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFbceoubASVFyPMl+Lam6W/THO4rpUyVqRide0QHDsaVTYMVwFnF10hyqT96sPs8I7vP0kBnbwLqjlF9+l8sx0= X-Received: by 2002:a25:904:0:b0:dbe:9509:141c with SMTP id 4-20020a250904000000b00dbe9509141cmr3320375ybj.30.1710882291473; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 14:04:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Adam Hassick Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 17:04:40 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: OVS Testing in the Community Lab To: Aaron Conole Cc: ci@dpdk.org, Patrick Robb , David Marchand , Kevin Traynor Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 3:28=E2=80=AFPM Aaron Conole w= rote: > > Adam Hassick writes: > > > Hi Aaron, > > > > I'm working on enabling OVS testing in the community lab. Currently, I > > have a compile test set up which follows the steps defined in the OVS > > documentation (https://docs.openvswitch.org/en/latest/intro/install/dpd= k/) > > and consumes the shared libraries produced by the DPDK native GCC > > compile test that we run. This way, we can save some compute resources > > by not compiling DPDK an additional time. However, this will mean that > > the OVS compile test will not run if the DPDK compile test fails in > > any environment, but I think that behavior is acceptable. What do you > > think? > > That is acceptable. However, we probably want to be a bit careful about > it because as DPDK changes, there may be some kind of API break that OVS > needs to know about. In that case, we might consider using the > dpdk-latest branch of ovs rather than ovs master. Ok, when running periodic tests on main we will use the dpdk-latest branch of OVS. Do you think we should include this test for incoming patches or just run periodic on main? If the OVS maintainers are interested in seeing these results, then we could send result emails to one of their mailing lists as well. > > The OVS compile test has passed successfully with DPDK main, which is p= romising. > > > > I'm unsure what the scope of our testing should be as well. Should we > > run the compile tests on all of our VM/container environments (to get > > good distro coverage), or just a few? And should we only run periodic > > testing on main or include LTS, next-* branches? > > This is a good question. OVS sticks with LTS branches, mostly, because > those are the ones which are "stable" from a maintenance standpoint. So > we're probably mostly going to build from dpdk stable branches. I see that OVS has a table of compatibility for DPDK LTS and OVS releases. Maybe we can start with periodic testing between these compatible releases and move forward from there. > > Regards, > > Adam >