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 1B6E6A0547 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 18:27:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1064941225; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 18:27:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-ej1-f47.google.com (mail-ej1-f47.google.com [209.85.218.47]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D78B34120D for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 18:27:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-ej1-f47.google.com with SMTP id a25so7547196ejv.6 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 09:27:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=s8OVd70r/qGs5xRDc2XX+xxujDcW9n2tYQwoHKfVclo=; b=g6tSspRWBNu9zolbB/Fn/bgD2qzHJX3br/4R5ADPc/jEGadjSOUQjFQnZsjFa0QA7c P2I8FndZPA3UH3kSmmo3bjAgDfUxuGDSYcBwmz3CvM5joFPtBDSHtFrzCrSTPbeGN07E 7lP+AHm2+pY70r5WvSBXPGa4zoiW6QHF9Tf9Y= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=s8OVd70r/qGs5xRDc2XX+xxujDcW9n2tYQwoHKfVclo=; b=tyGfkUMRi12NypvsjwM7VxsKgUSBXv6Efah6OGMkgnW5RQqEzbCydtWGVXzZyBrTOo F70GLw2WaitmmIoP0XCOCQZxUQ3OLpSluVzzaKODPtzawvmd9m2wQnFT5cFZik5pCzJB oHUYdzwJ5bbndiDR0eGiBjC7H5zXaDDJKwhJeRPzms2geWwixqHFUuX1d+FgY/fGhgGH jxQ8p64h2tVovwYJYnwjFW3Cnv8P0kASZpWsw1BFQvSI6lO5zvFJ5+oJlog6m0rfo3cB /kKEgwwlhs0/oHptt03fBHcqA6DUlAWMmoBmkr1qLsoXR3FfXsZ7fHd1/PiNTHrs+GB7 s+Qw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532mBCd/e2B8m+RguQdgCBH7WZHg8NFwBLybt9jaoUg3j5jOkOGV b0bODavLsHKVJ8QMncPxXX0WD4G08FNMT62krFCaq0Jplys= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyjLrxVcDSAWi1CWrqmx3ztbLHHhZG6BD/nPSbS1unGVwTdOCSqfg6EvM/g8mJjes0E9DYVNfYg/+b86u00JNU= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:7ad7:: with SMTP id k23mr4971368ejo.405.1629995257552; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 09:27:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1692874.CEL9UuTRB0@thomas> In-Reply-To: <1692874.CEL9UuTRB0@thomas> From: Lincoln Lavoie Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 12:27:24 -0400 Message-ID: To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: ci@dpdk.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004ffdaf05ca78d846" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] Community CI Meeting Minutes 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 Sender: "ci" --0000000000004ffdaf05ca78d846 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is specific to patches for DTS, where Intel doesn't have the infrastructure to run every possible test suite that is included in DTS. So, the warning is a notice to the submitter and the maintainer(s) the patch couldn't be tested. It's not really an issue related to the content of the patch itself (i.e. not about a breaking change or something like that). Cheers, Lincoln On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 12:05 PM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 26/08/2021 15:33, Lincoln Lavoie: > > * For DTS CI, should authors be notified of skipped testing (i.e. CI > infrastructure doesn=E2=80=99t support that test suite)? Should this be = marked as > a warning in patchwork? Agreed it should do both of these actions, notif= y > the author and mark the patch as warning in patchworks. > > Not sure to understand. > If a test is not supported, it is not an issue of the patch, > so why would it be reported in patchwork? > > > --=20 *Lincoln Lavoie* Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824 lylavoie@iol.unh.edu https://www.iol.unh.edu +1-603-674-2755 (m) --0000000000004ffdaf05ca78d846 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thi= s is specific to patches for DTS, where Intel doesn't have the infrastr= ucture to run every possible test suite=C2=A0that is included in DTS. So, t= he warning is a notice to the submitter and the maintainer(s) the patch cou= ldn't be tested. It's not really an issue related to the content of= the patch itself (i.e. not about a breaking change or something like that)= .

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 12:05 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
26/08/2021 15:33, Lincoln Lavoie:
> * For DTS CI, should authors be notified of skipped testing (i.e. CI i= nfrastructure doesn=E2=80=99t support that test suite)?=C2=A0 Should this b= e marked as a warning in patchwork?=C2=A0 Agreed it should do both of these= actions, notify the author and mark the patch as warning in patchworks.
Not sure to understand.
If a test is not supported, it is not an issue of the patch,
so why would it be reported in patchwork?




--
Lincoln Lavoie
Prin= cipal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, = Durham, NH 03824
+1-603-674-= 2755 (m)

--0000000000004ffdaf05ca78d846--