From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 16:21:35 +0100 From: "Cristian Marussi" Subject: Re: Contributing ARM tests results to KCIDB Message-ID: <20200918152135.GA13088@e119603-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20200917125044.GA29636@e119603-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20200917162242.GA18067@e119603-lin.cambridge.arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline List-ID: To: Nikolai Kondrashov Cc: kernelci@groups.io, broonie@kernel.org, basil.eljuse@arm.com Hi Nikolai, On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 08:26:15PM +0300, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote: > On 9/17/20 7:22 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote: > > It works too ... :D > > > > https://staging.kernelci.org:3000/d/build/build?orgId=1&var-dataset=playground_kernelci04&var-id=arm:2020-07-07:d3d7689c2cc9503266cac3bc777bb4ddae2e5f2e > > Whoa, awesome! > > And you have already uncovered a few issues we need to fix, too! > I will deal with them tomorrow. > > > ..quick question though....given that now I'll have to play quite a bit > > with it and see how's better to present our data, if anythinjg missing etc etc, > > is there any chance (or way) that if I submmit the same JSON report multiple > > times with slight differences here and there (but with the same IDs clearly) > > I'll get my DB updated in the bits I have changed: as an example I've just > > resubmitted the same report with added discovery_time and descriptions, and got > > NO errors, but I cannot see the changes in the UI (unless they have still to > > propagate...)..or maybe I can obtain the same effect by dropping my dataset > > before re-submitting ? > > Right now it's not supported (with various possible quirks if attempted). > So, preferably, submit only one, complete and final instance of each object > (with unique ID) for now. > > We have a plan to support merging missing properties across multiple reported > objects with the same ID. > > Object A Object B Dashboard/Notifications > > FieldX: Foo Foo Foo > FieldY: Bar Bar > FieldZ: Baz Baz > FieldU: Red Blue Red/Blue > > Since we're using a distributed database we cannot really maintain order > (without introducing artificial global lock), so the order of the reports > doesn't matter. We can only guarantee that a present value would override > missing value. It would be undefined which value would be picked among > multiple different values. > > This would allow gradual reporting of each object, but no editing, sorry. > > However, once again, this is a plan with some research done, only. > I plan to start implementing it within a few weeks. > So in order to carry on my experiments, I've just tried to push a new dataset with a few changes in my data-layout to mimic what I see other origins do; this contained something like 38 builds across 4 different revisions (with brand new revisions IDs), but I cannot see anything on the UI: I just keep seeing the old push from yesterday. JSON seems valid and kcidb-submit does not report any error even using -l DEBUG. (I pushed >30mins ago) Any idea ? Thanks Cristian > Nick > > On 9/17/20 7:22 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 04:52:30PM +0300, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote: > >> Hi Christian, > >> > >> On 9/17/20 3:50 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote: > >>> Hi Nikolai, > >>> > >>> I work at ARM in the Kernel team and, in short, we'd like certainly to > >>> contribute our internal Kernel test results to KCIDB. > >> > >> Wonderful! > >> > >>> After having attended your LPC2020 TestMC and KernelCI/BoF, I've now cooked > >>> up some KCIDB JSON test report (seemingly valid against your KCIDB v3 schema) > >>> and I'd like to start experimenting with kci-submit (on non-production > >>> instances), so as to assess how to fit our results into your schema and maybe > >>> contribute with some new KCIDB requirements if strictly needed. > >> > >> Great, this is exactly what we need, welcome aboard :) > >> > >> Please don't hesitate to reach out on kernelci@groups.io or on #kernelci on > >> freenode.net, if you have any questions, problems, or requirements. > >> > >>> Is it possible to get some valid credentials and a playground instance to > >>> point at ? > >> > >> Absolutely, I created credentials for you and sent them in a separate message. > >> > >> You can use origin "arm" for the start, unless you have multiple CI systems > >> and want to differentiate them somehow in your reports. > >> > >> Nick > >> > > Thanks ! > > > > It works too ... :D > > > > https://staging.kernelci.org:3000/d/build/build?orgId=1&var-dataset=playground_kernelci04&var-id=arm:2020-07-07:d3d7689c2cc9503266cac3bc777bb4ddae2e5f2e > > > > ..quick question though....given that now I'll have to play quite a bit > > with it and see how's better to present our data, if anythinjg missing etc etc, > > is there any chance (or way) that if I submmit the same JSON report multiple > > times with slight differences here and there (but with the same IDs clearly) > > I'll get my DB updated in the bits I have changed: as an example I've just > > resubmitted the same report with added discovery_time and descriptions, and got > > NO errors, but I cannot see the changes in the UI (unless they have still to > > propagate...)..or maybe I can obtain the same effect by dropping my dataset > > before re-submitting ? > > > > Regards > > > > Thanks > > > > Cristian > > > >> On 9/17/20 3:50 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote: > >>> Hi Nikolai, > >>> > >>> I work at ARM in the Kernel team and, in short, we'd like certainly to > >>> contribute our internal Kernel test results to KCIDB. > >>> > >>> After having attended your LPC2020 TestMC and KernelCI/BoF, I've now cooked > >>> up some KCIDB JSON test report (seemingly valid against your KCIDB v3 schema) > >>> and I'd like to start experimenting with kci-submit (on non-production > >>> instances), so as to assess how to fit our results into your schema and maybe > >>> contribute with some new KCIDB requirements if strictly needed. > >>> > >>> Is it possible to get some valid credentials and a playground instance to > >>> point at ? > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> > >>> Regards > >>> > >>> Cristian > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > >