From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CDCAA0597; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 18:51:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B996C1D15C; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 18:51:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 564A01C434 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 18:51:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00C2E5C2996; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 12:51:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 09 Apr 2020 12:51:09 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=fJlpEwtcYmjwZGLMrHNelhQmz7YETZJZdM7PiML1UJo=; b=b9hzJlaYwHhX lv5SAdfjlat+q58E8C41duRIIxXmRCrv8P8J65YlZzYDDicKN0JvnJGYWHCQRnbb htekpMJ16+QFCJWdavhEi0mKQhV2gYAOZiED/yXcMGzuHVoTY0SASXEQ09JKy4k5 QeRjIQ5P8DV3K9jVsrp9xCnK71++Xn4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=fJlpEwtcYmjwZGLMrHNelhQmz7YETZJZdM7PiML1U Jo=; b=APGMi3za46Kw5rkmz/rzqiaGDINGirGQmFQwSHv5WHTnqDgTTFWZZYUBN VozZ0phkb1zjgm63sxNWpQAhi8NGK3Olpk7sAgCafIv56ixinnCc8insyVSWa4gc SREI/YLKcGVByYBpP8O5utJurdGLisnJLs8U/ob3CyvLqZ2OcumB01MVwOyrEuZJ MYIidE5zewKCRnWU7GahSAb1hQ5Rz6p9cN11nJZxgnVCal+D2ScmpT0RMTlBCOYs HQTmv6jIPCg/TmK4iXxvM+j0NI/kqh6p3GRyPHwynFvdSXWJfTd51jnB+khMd8ex XX13kzmlyXhtOqE3tTAe+MdPDFIsA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrudelgddutddtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgr rhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 9E417306005B; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 12:51:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Bruce Richardson , Neil Horman , Ray Kinsella Cc: dev@dpdk.org, david.marchand@redhat.com Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 18:51:06 +0200 Message-ID: <1831256.eGJsNajkDb@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20200408195616.335004-1-nhorman@tuxdriver.com> <1907515.8hb0ThOEGa@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCHv2] Remove validate-abi.sh from tree X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 09/04/2020 18:29, Ray Kinsella: > On 09/04/2020 16:18, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 09/04/2020 16:52, Ray Kinsella: > >> On 09/04/2020 11:59, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >>> 09/04/2020 12:45, Ray Kinsella: > >>>> On 09/04/2020 11:43, Bruce Richardson wrote: > >>>>> On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 06:39:54AM -0400, Neil Horman wrote: > >>>>>> On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 08:57:34AM +0100, Ray Kinsella wrote: > >>>>>>> On 08/04/2020 20:56, Neil Horman wrote: > >>>>>>>> +The syntax of the ``check-abi.sh`` utility is:: > >>>>>>>> + > >>>>>>>> + ./devtools/check-abi.sh > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> (from v1 feedback) > >>>>>>> Could we simplify this all greatly, by telling people to use the meson/ninja build, > >>>>>>> so they get this checking out of the box, without all the headache below? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> I think bruce noted that was never merged, correct? > >>>>>> > >>>>> Yep, correct. :-( > >>>> > >>>> apologies, was there a reason? > >>> > >>> Because build tool job is building, not checking. > >>> It would be wrong to make (slow) checks mandatory in all builds. > >>> > >>> The need is to enforce checking ABI. > >>> The result is already published by Travis in patchwork and in an > >>> email to the author I believe. > >>> Not checking email and patchwork is not a good excuse. > >>> > >>> Patchwork must be a mandatory read for everybody for all checks > >>> in general. Let's not give up on general CI workflow. > >>> > >> > >> Thomas > >> > >> You are trying to solve two problems at once; CI tooling and ABI. > >> Let's try to solve one at a time. > > > > No, you want to mix two problems in a single tool :-) > > > > > >> 1. The ABI check, will make the build _marginally_ slower. > >> You _should_ only need to rebuild the changes between A and B. > > > > Not so marginal. > > A re-build takes less than a second. A mandatory check takes 10 secs > > on my machine. > > > > > >> 2. The meson/ninja are an order of magnitude faster than GNU Make. > >> We can afford this check. > > > > I am doing such build 10 times (each target) per patch. > > But that's not the main issue. > > > > > >> 3. If we want to lessen the ABI burden and send the correct message. > >> It should be a build blocker, contributors need to hear the message loud and clear. > > > > The developer needs to get or build/save the ABI reference. > > Making such ABI reference for each target is not so obvious: > > - all symbols must be enabled (dependencies) > > - some fixes may be needed for some compilers > > > > > >> Most important people _consuming_ DPDK will never see this message. > >> Only people _changing_ the ABI will see it - the people we want to hear the message loud and clear. > > > > No, they will have issue in DPDK compilation if something in the check > > goes wrong. We should not bother end users with internal checks. > > > > > > The message is > > a) run the check by > > 1) setting DPDK_ABI_REF_VERSION on command line or in devel.config file > > 2) running devtools/test-build.sh or devtools/test-meson-builds.sh > > b) check what Travis is reporting in > > - email to you > > - patchwork reports > > > > I think Travis report is convenient to use. > > The local check is integrated in build scripts > > but cannot be run by default because of the reasons above. > > Thomas the reality on this is that people have a tendency to filter > this messages into an email folder and don't always see them. > > My 2c is that this will always be a struggle unless we find a way > to make it un-ignore-able. > Hence my build-wiring suggestion. My other concern is that we will have the same issue with all checks done in a CI. I think the right approach is to enforce people checking CI results. They will be used to check CI in patchwork because the patches will be blocked.