#####################################################################
Attendees
* Patrick Robb
* Juraj Linkeš
* Paul Szczepanek
* Luca Vizzarro
* Nicholas Pratte

#####################################################################
Minutes

=====================================================================
General Announcements
* What does the path to project wide adoption look like for DTS?
   * Tech board laid out at the end of 2023 what the process should look like for building DTS adoption in DPDK
      * 1. Current DTS developers start writing testsuites for dpdk library X, demonstrating the framework (easily and effectively) supports testsuites for the library. If any gaps in the framework are discovered, submit the needed DTS framework patches for writing testsuites for dpdk library X.
         * 1.1 As this process gets under way, it’s important to start working with library maintainers to validate the new testsuites, and start to build the loose framework for what broad adoption will look like.
         * 1.2 To this end, UNH developers are supposed to write ethdev testsuites in 2024. The current timeline is that techboard will assess ethdev testsuite support in DTS at the end of 2024.
            * Paul notes that Luca too will be writing some ethdev suites in the future
            * Group should determine the “shortlist” of ethdev testsuite
               * Patrick Robbto the full list down for the next bi-weekly dts meeting
            * Always make a bugzilla ticket per testsuite before doing any work
               * please make a ticket for jumboframes: https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1421
      * 2. When DTS developers indicate DTS support for library X is ready, tech board will take it up as a discussion point and give that an up/down vote. And “up” vote will set the new policy that when DPDK developers submit a DPDK patch to library X, they are now required to also submit an associated testsuite/testcase addition which provides some test coverage for their new feature.
         * 2.1 DPDK CI labs will “pick up” the new testsuite additions alongside the new patches and run across their hardware.
* Jeremy has been on another project for a few weeks, but that’s wrapped up now and he’s back to focusing on DTS

=====================================================================
Patch discussions
* Hugepages patch:
   * V4 is submitted with some small improvements recommended by Juraj: https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20240418161026.2839-1-npratte@iol.unh.edu/
   * Juraj will send a review tag
* Jumboframes: Nick is writing this now, V1 should be coming soon
   * Bugzilla: https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1421
* Testpmd show port info/show port stats: https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=31729
* Testpmd statefullness / params class        
   * V2 will be forthcoming here
   * Jeremy can give a review on the V2 now that’s he’s back to DTS world…
   * Jeremy should assess for his patch whether show port info should be used as a tool to check capabilities
* Skip test cases based on capabilities
   * Jeremy still needs to provide feedback from his new scatter testsuite rebased off of this patch
* Replace XML-RPC server with scapy shell:
   * Coming soon to a mailing list near you.
* API-Docs generation patch
   * Review are needed for the latest version
   * Jeremy Spewockplease review
   * Nicholas Pratteplease build the docs again and provide another tested-by
* Renaming “Execution”
   * Idea is to rename to testrun
   * As it is a tiny patch it can be applied soon
* Juraj’s patch to remove OS-UDP suite
   * We want to remove the code which was added only to support the os-udp suite. This includes the code which allows for network configuration in the os. But, we may need some of this for scapy on the TG.
   * Bugzilla: https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1414
* Juraj submitted some small patches with cleanups like changing implicit object inheritance… etc.
* Interactive shells:
   * By default, the interactive shells are not run with admin privileges. For shells handling any DPDK apps, it may make sense to run with admin privilege.
   
=====================================================================
Bugzilla discussions
* Had some discussion on 1360 relating to how users should define node ports for an execution: https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1360
   * It’s not really execution specific, as the execution has things which we are configuring for a specific testrun. There will never be a different value for a specific port on a node, so this information should not go into the execution config block.
   * Individual nodes do not need to have the full port links stored as attributes. The port links can be created by the testsuite alone.
      * So, going forward the SUTNode and TGNode should contain ONLY local pci addresses, and these nodes are not aware of the full links
   * Store a list of “NICs” in the node config block, then specify the specific TG NIC and SUT NIC to use in the execution config for that given execution
      * New framework assumption: If I use NIC A and NIC B in a testsuite, the first port defined for NIC A is assumed to be linked to the first port defined in NIC B, 2nd to 2nd, 3rd to 3rd, etc.
      * Patrick Robbwrite example configuration on this bugzilla ticket to represent the above idea

=====================================================================
Any other business
* How to document test plans in new DTS? Can this always go in the testsuite class docstring? What if the writeup is very long?