From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E68A8C433FE for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:10:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F6D822AB9 for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:10:25 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6F6D822AB9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:39218 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1klBmy-0004vZ-0S for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 09:10:24 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49694) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1klBlf-0004JQ-Ft for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 09:09:05 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:50033) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1klBlc-0006xC-VB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 09:09:03 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1607090940; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=hrEKNlds9jNPkmf3UYRCFbHF3tDaMp0A/ThAyyhpwe0=; b=ZsWUAh4VV9NRrIBnR9uaM563i0KvsjEWD4ksVjqy1e9G4bIXQgThIqQZdWHy+ea5J8NyMh DYC6978I6yOMgV4BpBtLl5o0jhfmSAaBA3+BkojReRCu/GfNOh7iZ61dM6qOAmyQCR98FZ j8rUTCJQMFZzbhl3L9ZmxXdsiPWfOms= Received: from mail-ej1-f70.google.com (mail-ej1-f70.google.com [209.85.218.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-450-Q3lvJVV_P92tkpK_Clpupg-1; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 09:08:57 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Q3lvJVV_P92tkpK_Clpupg-1 Received: by mail-ej1-f70.google.com with SMTP id f21so2105145ejf.11 for ; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 06:08:56 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=hrEKNlds9jNPkmf3UYRCFbHF3tDaMp0A/ThAyyhpwe0=; b=NJL8Xk/nNCmLrlmCQEj5qkgsZBMVuRPqlRDBuF0w+C8gv5wnw1KdVy27Si42Z85TjF 8F3xfzQLGZTzmC5t0wwv2gk5fpmycJiFV34af/ISgPw7s3hJ1pg2hAuIa71nvSK3KnXi Z7aDQuGKOzLGHH+7OtP2sv9HIkBSzyQNpktTcSrZ7KPOI6u7/0Znap92M/CuA2yidIRQ Z4GOj5wTk71mT6YsM/enjl95VwekWhnJhEqOAkwDxN8SxsOxTpF8utJ+QJr2Od3XaX9n Le65mSlu8UdP6amMe2kTsdwCLfP50yer+/Q5zE+I4wUHgwf9CiF/yH80F4yDDt2d1J3x m4hA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532fVUBMr8W84so40DW5eAIVZLIEzfXI048FMaXVX0pNHPqw4QLa tmZLEeLOp/Xg+9YjoSRMLCFaxejZQvvdZk/rPMxwupgpgfQr+DkCtKxMJtRTQBW+ONe8QFMjMGw zdkHitchQis2bCVE= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:d09:: with SMTP id eb9mr7534637edb.71.1607090935334; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 06:08:55 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxBV7Q3RYNxghFf0PbjoSXpu4ny0NujeHpOEsfJKNrwqOmGxGAENxSb/PZtgsakqXXLJLKO/A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:d09:: with SMTP id eb9mr7534597edb.71.1607090935102; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 06:08:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.36] (111.red-88-21-205.staticip.rima-tde.net. [88.21.205.111]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ov22sm3231676ejb.23.2020.12.04.06.08.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 04 Dec 2020 06:08:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH-for-5.2? 1/1] Acceptance tests: bump Fedora to 32 To: =?UTF-8?Q?Daniel_P=2e_Berrang=c3=a9?= , Cleber Rosa References: <20201202215747.2719507-1-crosa@redhat.com> <20201202215747.2719507-2-crosa@redhat.com> <20201203165033.GB2787993@localhost.localdomain> <20201203170233.GK2952498@redhat.com> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= Message-ID: <5ee763b3-379e-45f7-2716-9b7e073d3ec7@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 15:08:52 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201203170233.GK2952498@redhat.com> Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=philmd@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=63.128.21.124; envelope-from=philmd@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -35 X-Spam_score: -3.6 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.496, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Peter Maydell , Thomas Huth , Eduardo Habkost , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Wainer dos Santos Moschetta , Willian Rampazzo , =?UTF-8?Q?Alex_Benn=c3=a9e?= , Beraldo Leal Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 12/3/20 6:02 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 11:50:33AM -0500, Cleber Rosa wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 10:37:01AM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>> On 12/2/20 10:57 PM, Cleber Rosa wrote: >>>> Currently in use Fedora 31 has been moved out of the standard download >>>> locations that are supported by the functionality provided by >>>> avocado.utils.vmimage. So right now, the boot_linux.py tests will get >>>> canceled by not being able to find those specific images. >>>> >>>> Ideally, this would be bumped to version 33. But, I've found issues >>>> with the aarch64 images, with various systemd services failing to >>>> start. So to keep all archs consistent, I've settled on 32. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Cleber Rosa >>>> --- >>>> tests/acceptance/boot_linux.py | 12 ++++++------ >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/tests/acceptance/boot_linux.py b/tests/acceptance/boot_linux.py >>>> index 1da4a53d6a..0824de008e 100644 >>>> --- a/tests/acceptance/boot_linux.py >>>> +++ b/tests/acceptance/boot_linux.py >>>> @@ -42,13 +42,13 @@ class BootLinuxBase(Test): >>>> vmimage.QEMU_IMG = qemu_img >>>> >>>> self.log.info('Downloading/preparing boot image') >>>> - # Fedora 31 only provides ppc64le images >>>> + # Fedora 32 only provides ppc64le images >>>> image_arch = self.arch >>>> if image_arch == 'ppc64': >>>> image_arch = 'ppc64le' >>>> try: >>>> boot = vmimage.get( >>>> - 'fedora', arch=image_arch, version='31', >>>> + 'fedora', arch=image_arch, version='32', >>> >>> I already expressed my view on this (latest QEMU should be >>> able to use at least f31 - which was tested - and eventually >>> f33 - which is coverage extension). I'm not going to vouch >>> this change. If other maintainers are happy with it, I don't >>> mind this gets merged. >>> >>> BTW I don't see why this is urgent for 5.2. >>> >>> Phil. >>> >> >> Hi Phil, >> >> Are you implying that, in your opinion, QEMU (say 5.2) should somehow >> provide compatibility with Fedora 31 because it was used during the >> entire cycle? I sympathize with that, but, QEMU is not really >> advertising compatibility support with specific Linux Distros, is it? What I don't understand is why you remove F31 and not simply add a F32 test. Why should I stop testing F31 if I have it cached? >> >> And, assuming that the issues I found on the Fedora 33 aarch64 image >> can not be worked around, would you suggest not moving to 32? I mean, >> I don't see a reason why QEMU shouldn't be able to use at least Fedora >> 32, which is a currently *active* version (different from 31). > > I think the problem with the Fedora acceptance is that we'll be constantly > chasing a moving target. Every URL we pick will go away 6-12 months later. > IOW, while the acceptance test pass today, in 6 months time they'll be > failing. IOW, switching to F32 doesn't solve the root cause, it just > pushs the problem down the road for 6 months until F32 is EOL and hits > the same URL change problem. > > One way to avoid this is to *not* actually test a current Fedora. > Instead intentionally point at an EOL Fedora release whose URL has > already moved to the archive site which is long term stable. I agree with Daniel, 'acceptance' test must not fail. Having an archived image allow us to not rely on external disappearing storage. > > Regards, > Daniel >