Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU Summit 2017: minutes

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 13:30:23 -0500
John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 11/28/2017 04:36 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 09:33:52 +0100
> > Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 27.11.2017 23:03, John Snow wrote:  
> >>>
> >>> On 11/23/2017 11:31 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:    
> >> [...]  
> >>>> Continuous Integration:
> >>>>  * Christian Borntraeger: qemu-iotests have broken a lot, they should be
> >>>>    run before patches are merged    
> >>>
> >>> This, rather unfortunately, is a huge testing burden. I try to make sure
> >>> I do it for everything I submit, but for the volume of block patches it
> >>> really does rely CI. The more we add (to our pitifully sparse iotesting,
> >>> I might add) the longer it takes. Ensuring per-patch testing begins to
> >>> take prohibitively long.
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps per-pull or per-merge becomes more feasible. Maybe if we do
> >>> implement a block-next amalgam we'd be able to batch our testing on a
> >>> weekly basis.    
> >>
> >> I think you block-layer folks should do at least run the qemu-iotests
> >> before sending a pull request to Peter. The iotests should really not be
> >> broken in upstream master.  
> > 
> > This is unlikely to cover the iotest failures on s390 (due to usage of
> > ccw, strange backing devices, etc.), though. We have basically two
> > options here:
> > - Continue to rely on the IBM folks finding those problems (which will
> >   likely be post-merge, but better than nothing.)
> > - Have patchew (which has a bot on s390) execute the iotests - which is
> >   time-consuming.
> >   
> 
> Does patchew test pull requests? Perhaps Peter could wait for an ACK
> from patchew before committing. Peter and patchew could check PRs in
> tandem and perhaps he can commit fully only when patchew ACKs.
> 
> for PRs specifically, perhaps patchew can indeed send an affirmative ACK
> to the list indicating success.

I'd assume patchew can figure out whether it deals with a pull request
by checking for 'PULL', and we post all patches in a pull request, so
some special handling might be feasible.

Fam, what do you think?