DPDK CI discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 20/05/2021
       [not found] <YKZSyX8NJuMZ4fY5@silpixa00399752>
@ 2021-05-20 12:51 ` Ferruh Yigit
  2021-05-20 19:19   ` Aaron Conole
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ferruh Yigit @ 2021-05-20 12:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aaron Conole; +Cc: ci

On 5/20/2021 1:15 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> Release status meeting minutes {Date}
> =====================================
> :Date: 20 May 2021
> :toc:

<...>

> * Coverity is running regularly
>   - Can we have out of cycle run for -rc4? Last run was yesterday.
>   - We need a way to verify coverity issues before merging it, will carry topic
>     to CI mail list an Aaron

Hi Aaron,

There is a need to verify coverity fixes before merging them. Do you think can
we do that? And should I create a Bugzilla ticket for it?

Thanks,
ferruh

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 20/05/2021
  2021-05-20 12:51 ` [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 20/05/2021 Ferruh Yigit
@ 2021-05-20 19:19   ` Aaron Conole
  2021-05-24 12:02     ` Ferruh Yigit
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Conole @ 2021-05-20 19:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ferruh Yigit; +Cc: ci

Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> writes:

> On 5/20/2021 1:15 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> Release status meeting minutes {Date}
>> =====================================
>> :Date: 20 May 2021
>> :toc:
>
> <...>
>
>> * Coverity is running regularly
>>   - Can we have out of cycle run for -rc4? Last run was yesterday.
>>   - We need a way to verify coverity issues before merging it, will carry topic
>>     to CI mail list an Aaron
>
> Hi Aaron,
>
> There is a need to verify coverity fixes before merging them. Do you think can
> we do that? And should I create a Bugzilla ticket for it?

I think you can create a BZ for it.  Last I remember, coverity does not
allow so many frequent builds (without paying?), so there is probably a
non-technical limitation.  Otherwise, we could simply submit all patch
series to coverity and look at the results.

As it stands, there is maybe more thought that has to come with this.

Maybe we can use a tag that indicates which coverity ID it purports to
fix, and we can then kick off a run.

> Thanks,
> ferruh


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 20/05/2021
  2021-05-20 19:19   ` Aaron Conole
@ 2021-05-24 12:02     ` Ferruh Yigit
  2021-05-24 12:13       ` Ali Alnubani
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ferruh Yigit @ 2021-05-24 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aaron Conole; +Cc: ci

On 5/20/2021 8:19 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> writes:
> 
>> On 5/20/2021 1:15 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>> Release status meeting minutes {Date}
>>> =====================================
>>> :Date: 20 May 2021
>>> :toc:
>>
>> <...>
>>
>>> * Coverity is running regularly
>>>   - Can we have out of cycle run for -rc4? Last run was yesterday.
>>>   - We need a way to verify coverity issues before merging it, will carry topic
>>>     to CI mail list an Aaron
>>
>> Hi Aaron,
>>
>> There is a need to verify coverity fixes before merging them. Do you think can
>> we do that? And should I create a Bugzilla ticket for it?
> 
> I think you can create a BZ for it.  Last I remember, coverity does not
> allow so many frequent builds (without paying?), so there is probably a
> non-technical limitation.  Otherwise, we could simply submit all patch
> series to coverity and look at the results.
> 
> As it stands, there is maybe more thought that has to come with this.
> 
> Maybe we can use a tag that indicates which coverity ID it purports to
> fix, and we can then kick off a run.
> 

Yes, we can only run coverity with the patches that has coverity tag.

Do we know the limitation on the run? Even if we can run once a day I think it
can be enough, coverity already not running daily, in the gap days coverity
patches can be verified.
Also we can skip coverity run if the main branch is not updated since last
check, this can gain some runs too.

Created following Bugzilla:
https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=719

btw, Aaron I didn't able to cc your Red Hat email but found following, can you
confirm it is your email address:
aconole@bytheb.org


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 20/05/2021
  2021-05-24 12:02     ` Ferruh Yigit
@ 2021-05-24 12:13       ` Ali Alnubani
  2021-05-24 16:11         ` Ferruh Yigit
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ali Alnubani @ 2021-05-24 12:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ferruh Yigit, Aaron Conole; +Cc: ci

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ci <ci-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Ferruh Yigit
> Sent: Monday, May 24, 2021 3:02 PM
> To: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 20/05/2021
> 
> On 5/20/2021 8:19 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
> > Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> writes:
> >
> >> On 5/20/2021 1:15 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> >>> Release status meeting minutes {Date}
> >>> =====================================
> >>> :Date: 20 May 2021
> >>> :toc:
> >>
> >> <...>
> >>
> >>> * Coverity is running regularly
> >>>   - Can we have out of cycle run for -rc4? Last run was yesterday.
> >>>   - We need a way to verify coverity issues before merging it, will carry
> topic
> >>>     to CI mail list an Aaron
> >>
> >> Hi Aaron,
> >>
> >> There is a need to verify coverity fixes before merging them. Do you
> >> think can we do that? And should I create a Bugzilla ticket for it?
> >
> > I think you can create a BZ for it.  Last I remember, coverity does
> > not allow so many frequent builds (without paying?), so there is
> > probably a non-technical limitation.  Otherwise, we could simply
> > submit all patch series to coverity and look at the results.
> >
> > As it stands, there is maybe more thought that has to come with this.
> >
> > Maybe we can use a tag that indicates which coverity ID it purports to
> > fix, and we can then kick off a run.
> >
> 
> Yes, we can only run coverity with the patches that has coverity tag.
> 
> Do we know the limitation on the run? Even if we can run once a day I think it
> can be enough, coverity already not running daily, in the gap days coverity
> patches can be verified.
> Also we can skip coverity run if the main branch is not updated since last
> check, this can gain some runs too.
> 
> Created following Bugzilla:
> https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=719
> 
> btw, Aaron I didn't able to cc your Red Hat email but found following, can you
> confirm it is your email address:
> aconole@bytheb.org

It should also be possible to run Coverity's cov-run-desktop binary to make sure a patchset doesn't introduce new defects in the first place. Is there a reason why we don't do this already?
The binary scans only the modified files and compares to the latest full scan to check how many new defects there are.
The binary can run on UNH's servers so I don't think it would be limited. Are we maybe limited by how many times we can pull the summary/data of the latest scan? We can pull it only once a day and use it offline mode.

Regards,
Ali

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 20/05/2021
  2021-05-24 12:13       ` Ali Alnubani
@ 2021-05-24 16:11         ` Ferruh Yigit
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ferruh Yigit @ 2021-05-24 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ali Alnubani, Aaron Conole; +Cc: ci

On 5/24/2021 1:13 PM, Ali Alnubani wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ci <ci-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Ferruh Yigit
>> Sent: Monday, May 24, 2021 3:02 PM
>> To: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>> Cc: ci@dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 20/05/2021
>>
>> On 5/20/2021 8:19 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
>>> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/20/2021 1:15 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>>>> Release status meeting minutes {Date}
>>>>> =====================================
>>>>> :Date: 20 May 2021
>>>>> :toc:
>>>>
>>>> <...>
>>>>
>>>>> * Coverity is running regularly
>>>>>   - Can we have out of cycle run for -rc4? Last run was yesterday.
>>>>>   - We need a way to verify coverity issues before merging it, will carry
>> topic
>>>>>     to CI mail list an Aaron
>>>>
>>>> Hi Aaron,
>>>>
>>>> There is a need to verify coverity fixes before merging them. Do you
>>>> think can we do that? And should I create a Bugzilla ticket for it?
>>>
>>> I think you can create a BZ for it.  Last I remember, coverity does
>>> not allow so many frequent builds (without paying?), so there is
>>> probably a non-technical limitation.  Otherwise, we could simply
>>> submit all patch series to coverity and look at the results.
>>>
>>> As it stands, there is maybe more thought that has to come with this.
>>>
>>> Maybe we can use a tag that indicates which coverity ID it purports to
>>> fix, and we can then kick off a run.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, we can only run coverity with the patches that has coverity tag.
>>
>> Do we know the limitation on the run? Even if we can run once a day I think it
>> can be enough, coverity already not running daily, in the gap days coverity
>> patches can be verified.
>> Also we can skip coverity run if the main branch is not updated since last
>> check, this can gain some runs too.
>>
>> Created following Bugzilla:
>> https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=719
>>
>> btw, Aaron I didn't able to cc your Red Hat email but found following, can you
>> confirm it is your email address:
>> aconole@bytheb.org
> 
> It should also be possible to run Coverity's cov-run-desktop binary to make sure a patchset doesn't introduce new defects in the first place. Is there a reason why we don't do this already?

If there is a way for developer to verify it easily, it is even better.

In the version of coverity I run, user is building project with the coverity
toolset and uploading the resulting binaries to the coverity server, which scans
and makes result available via web interface.

This way user can't validate the patch in the client, but if there is a way for
it we can try that too.

> The binary scans only the modified files and compares to the latest full scan to check how many new defects there are.
> The binary can run on UNH's servers so I don't think it would be limited. Are we maybe limited by how many times we can pull the summary/data of the latest scan? We can pull it only once a day and use it offline mode.
> 
> Regards,
> Ali
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-05-24 16:13 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <YKZSyX8NJuMZ4fY5@silpixa00399752>
2021-05-20 12:51 ` [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 20/05/2021 Ferruh Yigit
2021-05-20 19:19   ` Aaron Conole
2021-05-24 12:02     ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-05-24 12:13       ` Ali Alnubani
2021-05-24 16:11         ` Ferruh Yigit

DPDK CI discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/ci/0 ci/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 ci ci/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/ci \
		ci@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index ci

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.ci


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git