On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 08:40:44PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 27/09/2022 19.57, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 01:36:20PM -0400, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > > On Tue, 27 Sept 2022 at 11:54, Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 11:44:45AM -0400, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 27 Sept 2022 at 05:02, Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > now that Gitlab is giving us pressure on the amount of free CI > > > > > > minutes, I > > > > > > wonder whether we should maybe move the Cirrus-CI jobs out of the > > > > > > gitlab-CI > > > > > > dashboard again? We could add the jobs to our .cirrus-ci.yml file > > > > > > instead, > > > > > > like we did it in former times... > > > > > > > > > > > > Big advantage would be of course that the time for those jobs would > > > > > > not > > > > > > count in the Gitlab-CI minutes anymore. Disadvantage is of course > > > > > > that they > > > > > > do not show up in the gitlab-CI dashboard anymore, so there is no > > > > > > more > > > > > > e-mail notification about failed jobs, and you have to push to > > > > > > github, too, > > > > > > and finally check the results manually on cirrus-ci.com ... > > > > > > > > > > My understanding is that .gitlab-ci.d/cirrus.yml uses a GitLab CI job > > > > > to run the cirrus-run container image that forwards jobs to Cirrus-CI. > > > > > So GitLab CI resources are consumed waiting for Cirrus-CI to finish. > > > > > > > > > > This shouldn't affect gitlab.com/qemu-project where there are private > > > > > runners that do not consume GitLab CI minutes. > > > > > > > > > > Individual developers are affected though because they most likely > > > > > rely on the GitLab shared runner minutes quota. > > > > > > > > NB, none of the jobs should ever be run automatically anymore in > > > > QEMU CI pipelines. It always requires the maintainer to set the > > > > env var when pushing to git, to explicitly create a pipeline. > > > > You can then selectively start each individual job as desired. > > > > > > Cirrus CI is not automatically started when pushing to a personal > > > GitLab repo? If starting it requires manual action anyway then I think > > > nothing needs to be changed here. > > > > No pipeline at all is created unless you do > > > > git push -o ci.variable=QEMU_CI=1 <your-fork-remote> > > > > that creates the pipeliune but doesn't run any jobs - they're manual > > start. > > Yes, sure, the jobs are not started automatically. But I *do* want to run > the jobs before sending pull requests - but since the gitlab-CI minutes are > now very limited, I'd like to avoid burning these minutes via gitlab and > start those jobs directly on cirrus-ci.com again. For that the jobs would > need to be moved to our .cirrus-ci.yml file again.
We do need a better story for maintainers sending pull requests to have ability to run CI. We have 50+ jobs in the bujild stage of which the cirrus jobs are just 3 - removing the cirrus jobs won't make a difference to how quickly we run out of minutes if people try to run all of them. We need to define a much tighter minimalist set of recommended jobs to run. I believe that if QEMU joins the OSS program, then the forks of QEMU also benefit from a reduced cost factor for jobs they run, effectively giving you much higher CI quota > Well, maybe we could also have both, jobs via cirrus-run for those who want > to see them in their gitlab-CI dashboard, and via .cirrus-ci.yml for those > who want to avoid burning CI minutes on Gitlab. It's a little bit of > double-maintenance, but maybe acceptable? Key info about the jobs is in .gitlab-ci.d/cirrus/freebsd-12.vars which could be referenced from the cirrus-ci.yml to reduce duplication With 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 :|