KVM call agenda for 2013-01-29

KVM call agenda for 2013-01-29

[Juan Quintela]

Hi

Please send in any agenda topics you are interested in.

Later, Juan.

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for 2013-01-29

[Andreas Färber]

Am 28.01.2013 11:59, schrieb Juan Quintela:
> Please send in any agenda topics you are interested in.

Buildbot situation:
* Trees are not being added/updated in a timely fashion
* Insufficient build test coverage of trees (ppc, s390x, MinGW, BSD)

http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/qemu/builders

Stefan H. has access to some of the build slaves but not to the main
buildbot server for configuration, it seems.

If Daniel does not have sufficient time to administer it, can we maybe
have that set up on qemu.org instead, with more than one person that has
access to it?

Regards,
Andreas

-- 
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg

QEMU buildbot maintenance state (was: Re: KVM call agenda for 2013-01-29)

[Daniel Gollub]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2834 bytes --]

Hi Andreas,

thanks for bringing this topic up.

January was quite busy month for me so far I could only handle minor changes 
on the buildbot. I hesitate to make larger changes to avoid I break other 
stuff. So I just queued them up once I have more time (beginning in February 
or so)

I bounced now all open request from you and the suggestion of Gerd (with 
regards to append the log on the mail) to Christian Berendt - who is also 
maintaining the buildbot on buildbot.b1-systems.de

On Monday, January 28, 2013 02:02:27 PM Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 28.01.2013 11:59, schrieb Juan Quintela:
> > Please send in any agenda topics you are interested in.
> 
> Buildbot situation:
> * Trees are not being added/updated in a timely fashion

Primary reason why I hesitated to add new trees in the last weeks is pretty 
simple:
 - we run out of buildslave power
 - lack of time to setup new buildslaves


If anyone has some spare time and could provide us for a longer period 
buildslaves please drop me and Christian a mail for further instruction.



> * Insufficient build test coverage of trees (ppc, s390x, MinGW, BSD)
> 
> http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/qemu/builders


With regards to the build test coverage for all trees we would have to 
refactor the configuration a lot to make it more easier to add and maintain it 
in an easy way.

If you have some time left feel free to come up with a patch for that.
This is on my list - but it requires more time then I have available right now 
to make it "right".


(The failing macosx buildslave is known issue on the MacOSX site. The 
maintainer has also to investigate that at some later point due to lack of 
sufficient time.)


> 
> Stefan H. has access to some of the build slaves but not to the main
> buildbot server for configuration, it seems.

JFYI, the main buildbot configuration which controls everything (beside 
buildslave credentials) is accessible to everyone:
http://people.b1-systems.de/~gollub/buildbot/

If you are familiar with buildbot feel free to incorporate your suggested 
changes directly on a copy and send me or Christian the diff so we just have 
to review and apply it.

> 
> If Daniel does not have sufficient time to administer it, can we maybe
> have that set up on qemu.org instead, with more than one person that has
> access to it?

JFYI, I just requested if I am allowed to grant Stefan root access to our box. 
I would not mind to give him access - but need to check back with our IT 
first.

Best Regards,
Daniel

-- 
Daniel Gollub
Linux Consultant & Developer
Tel.: +49-160 47 73 970 
Mail: gollub@b1-systems.de

B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: QEMU buildbot maintenance state

[Andreas Färber]

Hi Daniel,

Am 28.01.2013 15:29, schrieb Daniel Gollub:
> thanks for bringing this topic up.
> 
> January was quite busy month for me so far I could only handle minor changes 
> on the buildbot. I hesitate to make larger changes to avoid I break other 
> stuff. So I just queued them up once I have more time (beginning in February 
> or so)
[snip]

Some kind of reply indicating so would've been nice, you were already
CC'ed last year a few times. ;)

Anyway, my point is that we are approaching Hard Freeze and seeing
weekly pulls with recurring breakages on one or another platform (pci on
ppc, s390x on mingw32). Some people have been assuming that if they
don't get mails from the build bots then their tree is okay to merge.

Our shortened release cycle leads to two weeks of Soft Freeze where
everyone pushes their queues before Feb 1 and most breakages occur.
During Hard Freeze we can still try to fix anything the bots report, but
catching errors before they land in master would be better:

At QEMU Summit Anthony requested that each submaintainer's tree be added
to the buildbot system; if there are as you now indicate build power
shortages, I suggest you specify what exactly is needed, maybe someone
in the community can help out. To me it was not clear at least. The
revived ppc slave is hopefully not running into a bottleneck yet. :)

I'll take a look at the config later.

Thanks,
Andreas

-- 
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg

Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU buildbot maintenance state (was: Re: KVM call agenda for 2013-01-29)

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:29:16PM +0100, Daniel Gollub wrote:
> > If Daniel does not have sufficient time to administer it, can we maybe
> > have that set up on qemu.org instead, with more than one person that has
> > access to it?
> 
> JFYI, I just requested if I am allowed to grant Stefan root access to our box. 
> I would not mind to give him access - but need to check back with our IT 
> first.

Thanks offering this.  Unfortunately I can't accept because I'm at the
limit of keeping up with my other QEMU responsibilities.  I don't have
enough time to do this job well.

Gerd: Are you willing to co-maintain the QEMU buildmaster with Daniel
and Christian?  It would be awesome if you could do this given your
experience running and customizing buildbot.

Stefan

Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU buildbot maintenance state

[Gerd Hoffmann]

  Hi,

> Gerd: Are you willing to co-maintain the QEMU buildmaster with Daniel
> and Christian?  It would be awesome if you could do this given your
> experience running and customizing buildbot.

I'll try to set aside some time for that.  Christians idea to host the
config at github is good, that certainly makes it easier to balance
things to more people.

Another thing which would be helpful:  Any chance we can setup a
maintainer tree mirror @ git.qemu.org?  A single repository where each
maintainer tree shows up as a branch?

This would make the buildbot setup *alot* easier.  We can go for a
AnyBranchScheduler then with BuildFactory and BuildConfig shared,
instead of needing one BuildFactory and BuildConfig per branch.  Also
makes the buildbot web interface less cluttered as we don't have a
insane amount of BuildConfigs any more.  And saves some resources
(bandwidth + diskspace) for the buildslaves.

I think people who want to look what is coming or who want to test stuff
cooking it would be a nice service too if they have a one-stop shop
where they can get everything.

cheers,
  Gerd

Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU buildbot maintenance state

[Anthony Liguori]

Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> writes:

>   Hi,
>
>> Gerd: Are you willing to co-maintain the QEMU buildmaster with Daniel
>> and Christian?  It would be awesome if you could do this given your
>> experience running and customizing buildbot.
>
> I'll try to set aside some time for that.  Christians idea to host the
> config at github is good, that certainly makes it easier to balance
> things to more people.
>
> Another thing which would be helpful:  Any chance we can setup a
> maintainer tree mirror @ git.qemu.org?  A single repository where each
> maintainer tree shows up as a branch?

I will setup a tree based on the 'T:' fields in MAINTAINERS.  So if you
want your tree to be part of buildbot, please make sure that you have a
correct entry in MAINTAINERS.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
> This would make the buildbot setup *alot* easier.  We can go for a
> AnyBranchScheduler then with BuildFactory and BuildConfig shared,
> instead of needing one BuildFactory and BuildConfig per branch.  Also
> makes the buildbot web interface less cluttered as we don't have a
> insane amount of BuildConfigs any more.  And saves some resources
> (bandwidth + diskspace) for the buildslaves.
>
> I think people who want to look what is coming or who want to test stuff
> cooking it would be a nice service too if they have a one-stop shop
> where they can get everything.
>
> cheers,
>   Gerd

Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU buildbot maintenance state

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:31:22AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>   Hi,
> 
> > Gerd: Are you willing to co-maintain the QEMU buildmaster with Daniel
> > and Christian?  It would be awesome if you could do this given your
> > experience running and customizing buildbot.
> 
> I'll try to set aside some time for that.  Christians idea to host the
> config at github is good, that certainly makes it easier to balance
> things to more people.
> 
> Another thing which would be helpful:  Any chance we can setup a
> maintainer tree mirror @ git.qemu.org?  A single repository where each
> maintainer tree shows up as a branch?
> 
> This would make the buildbot setup *alot* easier.  We can go for a
> AnyBranchScheduler then with BuildFactory and BuildConfig shared,
> instead of needing one BuildFactory and BuildConfig per branch.  Also
> makes the buildbot web interface less cluttered as we don't have a
> insane amount of BuildConfigs any more.  And saves some resources
> (bandwidth + diskspace) for the buildslaves.
> 
> I think people who want to look what is coming or who want to test stuff
> cooking it would be a nice service too if they have a one-stop shop
> where they can get everything.

I sent a pull request that makes the BuildFactory definitions simpler
using a single create_build_factory() function:

https://github.com/b1-systems/buildbot/pull/1

Keep in mind that BuildFactories differ not just by repo/branch but
also:
 * in-tree or out-of-tree
 * extra ./configure arguments
 * gmake instead of make

I think this means it is not as simple as defining a single
BuildFactory.

Stefan

Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU buildbot maintenance state

[Christian Berendt]

On 01/31/2013 01:54 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> I sent a pull request that makes the BuildFactory definitions simpler
> using a single create_build_factory() function:
>
> https://github.com/b1-systems/buildbot/pull/1

Stefan, I'll have a look later this day.

Christian.

-- 
Christian Berendt
Tel.: +49-171-5542175
Mail: berendt@b1-systems.de

B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537

Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU buildbot maintenance state

[Christian Berendt]

I merged the two pending pull requests and added the configurations of 
the qemu-kvm and kvm buildbots to the GitHub repository.

The daily cronjob on the buildbot system is now active and the 
configuration provided on GitHub will now be used.

The open change requests will be processed tomorrow.

Hope everything is still working, if not drop me a line.

Christian.

-- 
Christian Berendt
Solution Architect
Mail: berendt@b1-systems.de

B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537

Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU buildbot maintenance state

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:31:22AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>   Hi,
> 
> > Gerd: Are you willing to co-maintain the QEMU buildmaster with Daniel
> > and Christian?  It would be awesome if you could do this given your
> > experience running and customizing buildbot.
> 
> I'll try to set aside some time for that.

Excellent, thank you!

Stefan

Re: QEMU buildbot maintenance state

[Christian Berendt]

On 01/28/2013 03:29 PM, Daniel Gollub wrote:
> JFYI, the main buildbot configuration which controls everything (beside
> buildslave credentials) is accessible to everyone:
> http://people.b1-systems.de/~gollub/buildbot/
>
> If you are familiar with buildbot feel free to incorporate your suggested
> changes directly on a copy and send me or Christian the diff so we just have
> to review and apply it.

I moved the configuration on GitHub 
(https://github.com/b1-systems/buildbot). I'll add a cron job to the 
buildbot system to regular pull and apply the latest configuration. 
Simply open a pull request to modify the configuration.

I'll implement open requests for configuration changes as soon as 
possible (should be done tomorrow).

Christian.

-- 
Christian Berendt
Solution Architect
Mail: berendt@b1-systems.de

B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537

Re: QEMU buildbot maintenance state

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:04:39PM +0100, Christian Berendt wrote:
> On 01/28/2013 03:29 PM, Daniel Gollub wrote:
> >JFYI, the main buildbot configuration which controls everything (beside
> >buildslave credentials) is accessible to everyone:
> >http://people.b1-systems.de/~gollub/buildbot/
> >
> >If you are familiar with buildbot feel free to incorporate your suggested
> >changes directly on a copy and send me or Christian the diff so we just have
> >to review and apply it.
> 
> I moved the configuration on GitHub
> (https://github.com/b1-systems/buildbot). I'll add a cron job to the
> buildbot system to regular pull and apply the latest configuration.
> Simply open a pull request to modify the configuration.

Thanks Christian!  I have updated the QEMU wiki page:

http://wiki.qemu.org/ContinuousIntegration

Stefan

Re: KVM call agenda for 2013-01-29

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:59:40AM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Please send in any agenda topics you are interested in.

Replacing select(2) so that we will not hit the 1024 fd_set limit in the
future.

Stefan

Re: KVM call agenda for 2013-01-29

[Anthony Liguori]

Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> writes:

> Hi
>
> Please send in any agenda topics you are interested in.

 - Outstanding virtio work for 1.4
   - Multiqueue virtio-net (Amos/Michael)
   - Refactorings (Fred/Peter)
   - virtio-ccw (Cornelia/Alex)

We need to work out the ordering here and what's reasonable to merge
over the next week.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
> Later, Juan.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: KVM call agenda for 2013-01-29

[Alexander Graf]

On 28.01.2013, at 15:14, Anthony Liguori wrote:

> Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> writes:
> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> Please send in any agenda topics you are interested in.
> 
> - Outstanding virtio work for 1.4
>   - Multiqueue virtio-net (Amos/Michael)
>   - Refactorings (Fred/Peter)
>   - virtio-ccw (Cornelia/Alex)

- What's the plan for -device and IRQ assignment?

We need to start coming up with a solution to connect irq lines between cmdline created devices and interrupt controllers. Currently, I'm aware of 2 potential users

  - virtio-mmio
  - device assignment on platform devices

I see 2 options:

  - create a new platform bus that enumerates IRQs linearly, similar to how the ISA bus works
  - allow arbitrary irq pin connection using a global pin namespace


Alex

Re: KVM call agenda for 2013-01-29

[Peter Maydell]

On 29 January 2013 08:49, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> wrote:
> - What's the plan for -device and IRQ assignment?
>
> We need to start coming up with a solution to connect irq
> lines between cmdline created devices and interrupt
> controllers. Currently, I'm aware of 2 potential users
>
>   - virtio-mmio
>   - device assignment on platform devices
>
> I see 2 options:
>
>   - create a new platform bus that enumerates IRQs linearly,
> similar to how the ISA bus works
>   - allow arbitrary irq pin connection using a global pin
> namespace

Surely what you want is to specify IRQ connections via
something like "my-uart.irq => interrupt-controller.in[14]"
(adjust punctuation to taste)?

They're just device-to-device connections.

You also need some way of specifying where in a memory map
mmio devices should live. This is a little tricky because
you don't want to assume a global flat address space (in
future if we get the memory APIs right then devices could be
in the address space of just one of 4 CPUs, for instance).
  "my-uart.regs => cpu1.memory[0x4000..0x4100]" ?

-- PMM

Re: KVM call agenda for 2013-01-29

[Andreas Färber]

Am 28.01.2013 11:59, schrieb Juan Quintela:
> Please send in any agenda topics you are interested in.

I/O port rework:
* Proposal by Hervé: move I/O port list registration to ISA
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-01/msg00508.html

This causes modeling issues since PCI VGA/QXL then register I/O ports
via ISADevice API (using NULL ISADevice* argument) and require an ISABus
in machines that may not have one (e.g., New World Macs).
(kind of a QOM multi-inheritence issue)

Trivial conversion patches were reviewed by me and merged already.
Remaining question is how to proceed conceptually and design-wise in
lack of memory and ISA maintainers.

Background is that ppc has no concept of PIO and needs a "forwarding"
from PCI I/O MemoryRegion to PIO currently:
http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=commit;h=a178274efabcbbc5d44805b51def874e47051325
http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=commit;h=a3cfa18eb075c7ef78358ca1956fe7b01caa1724

Regards,
Andreas

-- 
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg