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 512CA43CB2; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 20:28:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2612640297; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 20:28:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B392A40041 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 20:27:58 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1710876478; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=LlPeDWG/SdNur2leoalLAlghQWjH7/XZ/gEgjNDbya0=; b=TL9BNYWRawQt3s/atv4vmIobbXJkI1SiyVAMy85kHzS8AwYmRgrBnIKCBsFgexsd4hRJYx dx3GcCk9X4JXLaJEDWCE6qU/8R8zt8GLuh8g1p69+yTbixwxygV5Ji93BKOH8UJyUPI4Pk JxHTuTINl7+KxyYN99Re4awclnabfKc= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx-ext.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-286-PSffnmhjOAW79O2YMOdsLg-1; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:27:56 -0400 X-MC-Unique: PSffnmhjOAW79O2YMOdsLg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 801213C0D7CA; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 19:27:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from RHTPC1VM0NT (dhcp-17-72.bos.redhat.com [10.18.17.72]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5577A1C060A4; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 19:27:56 +0000 (UTC) From: Aaron Conole To: Adam Hassick Cc: ci@dpdk.org, Patrick Robb , David Marchand , Kevin Traynor Subject: Re: OVS Testing in the Community Lab References: Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:27:56 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Adam Hassick's message of "Fri, 15 Mar 2024 11:19:05 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.7 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain 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 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/dpdk/) > 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. > The OVS compile test has passed successfully with DPDK main, which is promising. > > 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. > Regards, > Adam