[XEN PATCH v4] automation/eclair: add new analysis jobs with differing configurations

[XEN PATCH v4] automation/eclair: add new analysis jobs with differing configurations

[Nicola Vetrini]

The following analysis jobs are performed:
- eclair-{x86_64,ARM64}: analyze Xen using the default configuration for
  that architecture; runs on runners tagged `eclair-analysis'.

- eclair-{x86-64,ARM64}-safety: analyze Xen using the configuration for
  safety, which is more restricted; runs on runners tagged
  `eclair-analysis-safety`.

- eclair-{x86_64,ARM64}-testing: analyze Xen using the default
  configuration for the purposes of testing new runner updates; runs on
  runners tagged `eclair-analysis-testing`.

Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com>
---
CI pipeline: https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/bugseng/xen/-/pipelines/2136967775

Note: the eclair-ARM64 and eclair-x86_64 jobs are allowed to fail because the
configuration is not (yet) clean for all checked MISRA guidelines.

Changes in v4:
- Do not allow *-safety jobs to fail, as they should be clean
- Drop check on CI_COMMIT_BRANCH for *-safety analyses
Changes in v3:
- Use a variable instead of testing the repository PATH to decide whether a job
  should be run for *-testing and *-safety analyses;
- Allow eclair-{x86_64,ARM64} default configurations to fail, as the configuration
  is not yet clean for MISRA.
Changes in v2:
- rebased to current staging;
- fixed regex path issue.
---
 automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+)

diff --git a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
index d50721006740..d22d1dbbc3de 100644
--- a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
+++ b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
@@ -45,6 +45,23 @@ eclair-x86_64:
     LOGFILE: "eclair-x86_64.log"
     VARIANT: "X86_64"
     RULESET: "monitored"
+  allow_failure: true
+
+eclair-x86_64-testing:
+  extends: eclair-x86_64
+  tags:
+    - eclair-analysis-testing
+  rules:
+    - if: $ECLAIR_TESTING
+      when: always
+    - !reference [.eclair-analysis:triggered, rules]
+
+eclair-x86_64-safety:
+  extends: eclair-x86_64
+  tags:
+    - eclair-analysis-safety
+  allow_failure: false
+  variables:
     EXTRA_XEN_CONFIG: |
       CONFIG_AMD=y
       CONFIG_INTEL=n
@@ -75,6 +92,10 @@ eclair-x86_64:
       CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKS=n
       CONFIG_SCRUB_DEBUG=n
       CONFIG_XMEM_POOL_POISON=n
+  rules:
+    - if: $ECLAIR_SAFETY
+      when: always
+    - !reference [.eclair-analysis:triggered, rules]
 
 eclair-ARM64:
   extends: .eclair-analysis:triggered
@@ -82,6 +103,23 @@ eclair-ARM64:
     LOGFILE: "eclair-ARM64.log"
     VARIANT: "ARM64"
     RULESET: "monitored"
+  allow_failure: true
+
+eclair-ARM64-testing:
+  extends: eclair-ARM64
+  tags:
+    - eclair-analysis-testing
+  rules:
+    - if: $ECLAIR_TESTING
+      when: always
+    - !reference [.eclair-analysis:triggered, rules]
+
+eclair-ARM64-safety:
+  extends: eclair-ARM64
+  tags:
+    - eclair-analysis-safety
+  allow_failure: false
+  variables:
     EXTRA_XEN_CONFIG: |
       CONFIG_NR_CPUS=16
       CONFIG_GICV2=n
@@ -120,6 +158,10 @@ eclair-ARM64:
       CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKS=n
       CONFIG_SCRUB_DEBUG=n
       CONFIG_XMEM_POOL_POISON=n
+  rules:
+    - if: $ECLAIR_SAFETY
+      when: always
+    - !reference [.eclair-analysis, rules]
 
 .eclair-analysis:on-schedule:
   extends: .eclair-analysis
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [XEN PATCH v4] automation/eclair: add new analysis jobs with differing configurations

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Mon, 3 Nov 2025, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> The following analysis jobs are performed:
> - eclair-{x86_64,ARM64}: analyze Xen using the default configuration for
>   that architecture; runs on runners tagged `eclair-analysis'.
> 
> - eclair-{x86-64,ARM64}-safety: analyze Xen using the configuration for
>   safety, which is more restricted; runs on runners tagged
>   `eclair-analysis-safety`.
> 
> - eclair-{x86_64,ARM64}-testing: analyze Xen using the default
>   configuration for the purposes of testing new runner updates; runs on
>   runners tagged `eclair-analysis-testing`.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com>

Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>

I'll commit it as soon as the tree reopens.


> ---
> CI pipeline: https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/bugseng/xen/-/pipelines/2136967775
> 
> Note: the eclair-ARM64 and eclair-x86_64 jobs are allowed to fail because the
> configuration is not (yet) clean for all checked MISRA guidelines.
> 
> Changes in v4:
> - Do not allow *-safety jobs to fail, as they should be clean
> - Drop check on CI_COMMIT_BRANCH for *-safety analyses
> Changes in v3:
> - Use a variable instead of testing the repository PATH to decide whether a job
>   should be run for *-testing and *-safety analyses;
> - Allow eclair-{x86_64,ARM64} default configurations to fail, as the configuration
>   is not yet clean for MISRA.
> Changes in v2:
> - rebased to current staging;
> - fixed regex path issue.
> ---
>  automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 42 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
> index d50721006740..d22d1dbbc3de 100644
> --- a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
> +++ b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
> @@ -45,6 +45,23 @@ eclair-x86_64:
>      LOGFILE: "eclair-x86_64.log"
>      VARIANT: "X86_64"
>      RULESET: "monitored"
> +  allow_failure: true
> +
> +eclair-x86_64-testing:
> +  extends: eclair-x86_64
> +  tags:
> +    - eclair-analysis-testing
> +  rules:
> +    - if: $ECLAIR_TESTING
> +      when: always
> +    - !reference [.eclair-analysis:triggered, rules]
> +
> +eclair-x86_64-safety:
> +  extends: eclair-x86_64
> +  tags:
> +    - eclair-analysis-safety
> +  allow_failure: false
> +  variables:
>      EXTRA_XEN_CONFIG: |
>        CONFIG_AMD=y
>        CONFIG_INTEL=n
> @@ -75,6 +92,10 @@ eclair-x86_64:
>        CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKS=n
>        CONFIG_SCRUB_DEBUG=n
>        CONFIG_XMEM_POOL_POISON=n
> +  rules:
> +    - if: $ECLAIR_SAFETY
> +      when: always
> +    - !reference [.eclair-analysis:triggered, rules]
>  
>  eclair-ARM64:
>    extends: .eclair-analysis:triggered
> @@ -82,6 +103,23 @@ eclair-ARM64:
>      LOGFILE: "eclair-ARM64.log"
>      VARIANT: "ARM64"
>      RULESET: "monitored"
> +  allow_failure: true
> +
> +eclair-ARM64-testing:
> +  extends: eclair-ARM64
> +  tags:
> +    - eclair-analysis-testing
> +  rules:
> +    - if: $ECLAIR_TESTING
> +      when: always
> +    - !reference [.eclair-analysis:triggered, rules]
> +
> +eclair-ARM64-safety:
> +  extends: eclair-ARM64
> +  tags:
> +    - eclair-analysis-safety
> +  allow_failure: false
> +  variables:
>      EXTRA_XEN_CONFIG: |
>        CONFIG_NR_CPUS=16
>        CONFIG_GICV2=n
> @@ -120,6 +158,10 @@ eclair-ARM64:
>        CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKS=n
>        CONFIG_SCRUB_DEBUG=n
>        CONFIG_XMEM_POOL_POISON=n
> +  rules:
> +    - if: $ECLAIR_SAFETY
> +      when: always
> +    - !reference [.eclair-analysis, rules]
>  
>  .eclair-analysis:on-schedule:
>    extends: .eclair-analysis
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 

Re: [XEN PATCH v4] automation/eclair: add new analysis jobs with differing configurations

[Nicola Vetrini]

On 2025-11-03 23:52, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2025, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>> The following analysis jobs are performed:
>> - eclair-{x86_64,ARM64}: analyze Xen using the default configuration 
>> for
>>   that architecture; runs on runners tagged `eclair-analysis'.
>> 
>> - eclair-{x86-64,ARM64}-safety: analyze Xen using the configuration 
>> for
>>   safety, which is more restricted; runs on runners tagged
>>   `eclair-analysis-safety`.
>> 
>> - eclair-{x86_64,ARM64}-testing: analyze Xen using the default
>>   configuration for the purposes of testing new runner updates; runs 
>> on
>>   runners tagged `eclair-analysis-testing`.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
> 
> I'll commit it as soon as the tree reopens.
> 

Hi Stefano,

could you merge the change or do you want me to rebase? (there should be 
no conflicts however)

Thanks


-- 
Nicola Vetrini, B.Sc.
Software Engineer
BUGSENG (https://bugseng.com)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicola-vetrini-a42471253