From: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kdevops@lists.linux.dev,
"Jim Zemlin" <jzemlin@linux-foundation.org>,
"Konstantin Ryabitsev" <mricon@kernel.org>,
"Javier González" <javier.gonz@samsung.com>,
"Greg Marsden" <greg.marsden@oracle.com>,
"Tso Ted" <tytso@mit.edu>, "Gustavo Padovan" <gus@collabora.com>,
"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
"Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Subject: Re: The future of kernel-patches-daemon - folding under LF?
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 22:28:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPhsuW5HYYvGoFO2L81EBkHDmozxxjpmdRh+GPrAxea-+91YNQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z_6bxZUiodrE45HJ@bombadil.infradead.org>
Hi Luis,
How about we discuss different options over a video conference?
We have a BPF office hour scheduled every Thursday at 9am PST.
Would this time work for folks?
Thanks,
Song
On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 10:47 AM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Song,
>
> We're starting to rely on kernel-patches-deamon (kpd in short) [0] for quite a
> bit of linux-kernel subsystems and have integrated it on kdevops for them [1]
> [2]. We already use it for the modules subsystem but even then that runs into
> hiccups every now and then and we just have to restart it. For smaller
> subsystems we've started to experiment with lei based patchwork solutions, we
> started with the firmware loader, and the hope was that if that works we could
> move on to memory management to leverage the automation of tests we have for
> xarray, maple tree, and vmas. The lei patchwork instance which kernel.org admins
> have helped us with works well, however kpd doesn't yet work with it [3], so we
> can't even get that off the ground yet. In the meantime, we've been instead
> relying on linux-next tags to test other subsystems like memory management so we
> avoid regressions that way, instead of testing patches while on the mailing
> list. But we do want to get to the point we can test things proactively for
> different subsystems.
>
> While we could look for alternatives I think we need to face the fact that we
> need more kpd love. I'm convinced that the only way to scale Linux kernel-ci
> work is by dividing and conquering and those can contribute to different
> components do so, and kpd fits well right in, but I think we need to start
> thinking about scaling it beyond just Meta. While we could just try to
> contribute to it to fix lingering bugs I've noted my first issue with it,
> requring CLA [4], and I don't think it makes sense to fork it from Meta. kpd the
> sort of specialized daemon that also can take time to learn and believe at this
> point it might make sense if kpd can be part of the LF covered toolbox we can
> get support for. Ie, make it an LF project and see if we can get more help with
> the sort of pipelines that fit both Meta and the kernel community.
>
> Let me know your thoughts.
>
> [0] https://github.com/facebookincubator/kernel-patches-daemon
> [1] https://github.com/linux-kdevops/kdevops/blob/main/docs/kernel-ci/README.md
> [2] https://github.com/linux-kdevops/kdevops/blob/main/docs/kernel-ci/kernel-ci-kpd.md
> [3] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAB=NE6X5mJJmcXjEkHyE=2f1CCA5fDDEjMFH_aMArrhom2qO8Q@mail.gmail.com
> [4] https://github.com/facebookincubator/kernel-patches-daemon/issues/62
>
> Luis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-17 5:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-15 17:47 The future of kernel-patches-daemon - folding under LF? Luis Chamberlain
2025-04-17 5:28 ` Song Liu [this message]
2025-04-17 14:53 ` Luis Chamberlain
2025-04-17 20:06 ` Song Liu
2025-05-02 20:41 ` Song Liu
2025-05-02 21:23 ` Luis Chamberlain
2025-05-13 19:27 ` Gustavo Padovan
2025-05-14 19:22 ` Luis Chamberlain
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAPhsuW5HYYvGoFO2L81EBkHDmozxxjpmdRh+GPrAxea-+91YNQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=song@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=greg.marsden@oracle.com \
--cc=gus@collabora.com \
--cc=javier.gonz@samsung.com \
--cc=jzemlin@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kdevops@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=mricon@kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox