On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 13:30:23 -0500 John Snow <js...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 11/28/2017 04:36 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 09:33:52 +0100 > > Thomas Huth <th...@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?
