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 D98FC45BC0; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 15:41:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEA9840281; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 15:41:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E48C740265 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 15:41:57 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1729777317; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type; bh=gCvSbFF/QnuBePbDrvKNeP8kS0Be9TbfyBSV+HIh3pY=; b=SJnitntzbKSRgnjtSQGJFrjKy5Utf27Tz4gFtOf/CXfL8UJLs+qRZ850vga4XSVhXfY7Xf JG4ppidV+X3FJZ+SYPPFGnFITZg/AwsuJjwHsJVSWljONGQ0jGPAfdE9YQB/iXrz4ZYiDn GJdT6orKzhzj77p5QsJcm6a8sA9lmTA= Received: from mx-prod-mc-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-167-tNHD79HdMUq4AD7WHl3Z-Q-1; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 09:41:56 -0400 X-MC-Unique: tNHD79HdMUq4AD7WHl3Z-Q-1 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (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 mx-prod-mc-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D4361944F00; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 13:41:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from RHTRH0061144 (unknown [10.22.65.241]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 343D919560A2; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 13:41:53 +0000 (UTC) From: Aaron Conole To: techboard@dpdk.org, dev@dpdk.org Subject: Tech Board Meeting Minutes - Sept. 23, 2024 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 09:41:52 -0400 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Attendees --------- Aaron Conole Bruce Richardson David Marchand Hemant Agrawal Honnappa Nagarahalli Kevin Traynor Konstantin Ananyev Maxime Coquelin Morten Brorup Robin Jarry Stephen Hemminger Thomas Monjalon Notes ----- The Tech Board met at a f2f session in Montreal, prior to the DPDK Summit. This meeting went much longer than a typical Tech Board meeting. Agenda ------ * Prep. for the summit ** Make sure people helping to monitor live stream know what they are doing ** Discussion about board q&a ** Discussion about workshops ** Will need people to help do leading at the workshop sessions * Code challenge ** Idea: identify and promote tools to help detect issues early *** Tech board needs to give some guidance for this effort, since it isn't well known how to move forward. *** Does it have some CI component? Can't just turn it on unless everything is passing, otherwise it will put expected failures. ** Idea: offer some rewards for these efforts *** What kinds of rewards to offer? ** Idea: can we also hire someone? * Events discussion ** Techboard doesn't have much transparency on how the decision for venue, location, etc. is chosen. *** Ex: reasoning for venues and locations isn't well known *** Ex: Montreal had difficult visa process which resulted in some missed in-person attendance. ** Techboard would like to be able to give some input on the process *** Ex: hotels for the events have been costly ** We would like some of the maintainers to also be sponsored for attendance: *** David Marchand *** Akhil Goyal *** Ferruh Yigit ** Remote / hybrid speaking is going to have to be a way of life. We should reconsider the remote spoeaker statuses. We needed to scramble at the last minute to accommodate remote speakers. *** We also want to continue to give preference to in-person. ** Awards, gifts, etc. *** We used to give awards for different areas, and we would like to return to doing that. *** We want to give speaker gifts, if possible. *** Maybe also do some recognition **** Thomas to do slides for 'hall of fame' kind of recognition to contributors. * Marketing discussion ** We aren't sure what the marketing goals are ** We feel that the marketing for the events was quite good ** Maybe we can have a session with marketing to understand what the other goals of marketing are. ** Is there a way to have marketing show the value of investing in DPDK to the users (ie: rather than just taking DPDK code and disappearing)? ** Reminder to interview with Ben during the conference * Testing ** Intel lab having issues *** Need to sync with John McNamara and others about the system *** Seems that the Intel CI is in a barely maintained state. **** Ex: Testing old OSes, but not newer ones, etc. *** Bruce will send a message. ** Ask for the lab to test grout *** Aaron to sync with Patrick about it ** DTS *** Basic testing for ethdev to complete by the end of this year *** What are we targeting next? **** Ex: maybe rte_flow? *** Need guides for how to run DTS. Maybe youtube videos? **** Presentation at the conference might cover some of this. **** More should be done - blog posts, documentation, etc. ** Testing gaps we might have *** Kernel has Syzbot fuzzer that just randomly hits APIs with garbage data to try and break things **** Can we have something like this in DPDK? **** Needs to be automated **** Do we need reference implementations on the behavior to test against? At least if there aren't crashes that is good. **** How can we implement it? ** Can we add some kind of testing initiatives to the code challenge? * Gov. Board ** We haven't gotten many meeting minutes ** We like the rotating tech board representative ** Gov. board gives initiative requests to tech board, but there aren't any kind of resources attached. *** would be good to have guarantees about spending time on these initiatives. ** Need more transparency where possible. * Tech board ** Need to do more outreach for contributions. * Feature / Bug tracking ** Make sure maintainers are on the bug database and getting mails *** They are supposed to be ** Kevin will push on bugs to come to resolution. ** Roadmap on the website is out of date *** Goal is to avoid duplicating work across organizations *** The roadmap shouldn't be used to have some feature requests, but should really show what someone is working on. *** Work needs to be tied to specific individuals. *** Need to remove any outdated details / rework the roadmap display. ** Feature requests *** are they useful? who will work on them? *** Formal feature request process might give a false hope that someone will work on something. *** Better to be on the mailing list rather than bugzilla so that others can have involvement with discussions * TOO MANY PATCHES ** We have a huge patch backlog *** Stephen can take another pass through the patchwork backlog, but the whole thing doesn't scale ** Need more reviewers *** Getting quality reviews where someone will use 'Reviewed-by' vs. merely acknowledging that some idea is reasonable to accept with 'Acked-by' *** How to get more people motivated to review *** Reviews are a large burden right now on David and Thomas primarily. ** Can we auto-merge patches? *** Other communities do this, and merge if someone hasn't commented in a few days' time. *** If someone breaks code, then it will incentivize people to do more reviewing... maybe? ** Can we find another person to do the kind of maintenance that David and Thomas do? *** Plan is to use the maintainers meeting to discuss ** Ask Gov Board to ask their respective comanies for more reviewers * Branches ** Maybe restart the short-term stable releases *** Difficult to see the value *** Already exists a way to get point releases, someone just needs to step up for those, but no one does * Grout ** project aims to replicate CNF/VNF use cases * discussion about where apps fit ** testpmd and apps naming don't seem right? * Cloud initiative ** Amazon *** Wants to participate in CI ** Microsoft *** Discussions will start soon ** Who else to reach out to? *** Ali Baba? *** others? * Security ** Status doc to be published ** Protocols we want to see? *** Wireguard? *** psp? * AI ** Use as a tool in Patch Reviews? *** Aaron has some code that kindof does it *** Needs robust training data *** Costly to integrate ** Do we need more publicity of mldev?