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=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 6C799C433C1 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 13:33:06 +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 E0863619C1 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 13:33:05 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E0863619C1 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]:47852 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lREUS-0005rd-Qa for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 09:33:04 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41718) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lREPs-0001bf-84 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 09:28:20 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:49462) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lREPm-0004pU-Tn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 09:28:19 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1617110893; h=from:from:reply-to: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=G9bWe4rtBqsYOFYDpn6dLVJnn+s+EAuw5A+XcldmJ7E=; b=Rzl1HkY/LIuw9NHnkxNLmOpdkSAAFP0pBxj932MIwZBAFZ2TuHpHo9Izq7CEONthaItxih ybmJmeekMUbbFKK+74VRsOlpuyputSZ3BLHX6744zb2tjuVyyWtivmkIGOzXG1Tt1JHOWZ X79OF7cM1lq8KXqL68MvurhzadE8Tac= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-164-OJlD2DhKN9aBG0Bo4l8Jqw-1; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 09:28:09 -0400 X-MC-Unique: OJlD2DhKN9aBG0Bo4l8Jqw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBFB88030C9; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 13:28:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-114-2.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.114.2]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65FAE60938; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 13:27:54 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 14:27:51 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: Serious doubts about Gitlab CI Message-ID: References: <04e5e251-7a09-dcf6-82ad-31bf696bc248@redhat.com> <902a93ca-bd71-504b-fcf5-fec2480f9ec0@redhat.com> <1bb868bb-d9d7-3a9a-cbd4-2e1780b46442@redhat.com> <23fcbe91-1b9c-559d-1a61-6cce839bb390@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <23fcbe91-1b9c-559d-1a61-6cce839bb390@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/2.0.5 (2021-01-21) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=berrange@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Cc: Peter Maydell , Thomas Huth , qemu-devel , Richard Henderson , Andrew Jones , Wainer dos Santos Moschetta , Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= , Stefan Hajnoczi , Cleber Rosa , =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau , Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 03:19:49PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 30/03/21 15:12, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > Now, but that may change already in 6.1 in order to add CFI support. > > We can bundle a newer version, but we don't need to require a newer > > version. Simply conditional compile for the bits we need. If distro > > slirp is too old, then sorry, you can't enable CFI + slirp at the > > same time. If the distro really wants that combination we don't have > > to own the solution - the distro should update their slirp. > > > > Or to put it another way, QEMU doesn't need to go out of its way to > > enable new features on old distros. We merely need to not regress > > in the features we previously offered. We bundled slirp as a submodule > > so that old distros didn't loose slirp entirely. We don't need to > > offer CFI on those distros. > > This is true, on the other hand only having to support one API version has > its benefits. The complication in the build system is minimal once slirp is > made into a subproject; therefore it is appealing to keep the QEMU code > simple. I don't think slirp is special in this regard. The benefit you're promoting here applies to any dependancy we have, but I think the benefit is not big enough to justify. The use of submodules has imposed significant pain on QEMU developers over the years, and as such I think our general goal should be to have zero git submodules over the long term. Usage of submodules ought to be considered a short term workaround only, with a clear criteria for removal. We should continually introduce dependancies on newer & newer versions, as that means we'll never have any opportunity to remove them and reduce the cost on QEMU. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|