On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 02:46:03PM +0100, Ayan Kumar Halder wrote: > Hi Roger, > > On 02/06/2023 12:43, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 09:48:48AM +0100, Ayan Kumar Halder wrote: > > > Hi Xen developers, > > > > > > We are trying to better document xen project development processes and > > > related tools. At present, we are targeting **x86 and Arm** only. > > > > > > These tools range from bug/change request tracking means, compilers, > > > infra, > > > editors, code-review tools, etc which is connected in some way to the Xen > > > development and is being currently used by xen-devel community. > > What is the end goal of this? > > We are trying to do an initial assesment of the requirements for Xen > functional safety. > > As a first step, I am trying to make a list tools which are in someways > related to Xen development/testing/deployment. > > > > > I'm kind of unsure why do you care about which editor I use to > > generate my code, that's up to the developer. > > I agree that editor, email-clients are something that are an individual > developer's choice. > > However as it is related to Xen development, we want to atleast put down > some of the commonly used tools. > > At a later state when (and if) we go through the list with a safety > assessor, we might prune some of these items.
I have very little idea about what's required for a safety assessor, sorry. Will this have an impact on what tools are allowed to be used when working with certain parts of Xen? (the safety certifiable parts I would assume) > > > > > I appreciate if you can let me know anything I missed or mistaken and the > > > version currently being used (for some of the tools). > > > > > > > > > 1. Code management portal - xenbits (https://xenbits.xenproject.org), > > > gitlab > > > (https://gitlab.com/xen-project/xen) > > > > > > 2. Project description - wiki.xenproject.org > > > > > > 3. Project management - gitlab > > > > > > 4. Code review - text based email clients (mutt, thunderbird), git-email, > > > b4 > > > > > > 5. Text Editors such as vim, emacs > > > > > > 6. Code review history - xen-devel mail archives > > > > > > 7. Code revision management - git > > > > > > 8. Xen coding language - C89, C99, Kconfig > > assembly (gas), python, perl, shell, Makefile, bison, flex, ocaml, > > go... > > > > Likely more that I've missed. > Ack > > > > > 9. Testing tools for Arm64 in gitlab CI > > > > > > compiler - gcc-9.3.0 (Alpine 3.12)) (most commonly used version) > > > > > > binutils - GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.38.9 > > > > > > emulator/hw - qemu-system-aarch64-6.0.0, qemuarm64 6.2.0 (From yocto, poky > > > disto - 4.0.5), zcu102 (**need the uboot, TF-A versions **) > > > > > > dom0/domU kernel - kernel-5.19.0 > > > > > > rootfs - alpine-3.12-arm64-rootfs > > > > > > firmware - U-Boot 2022.10 > > > > > > 10. Testing tools for Arm in gitlab CI > > > > > > compiler - arm-poky-linux-gnueabi-gcc (GCC) 11.3.0, > > > arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc > > > (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0 (most commonly used versions) > > > > > > emulator/hw - qemu-system-arm 6.2.0 (From yocto, poky disto - 4.0.5) > > > > > > dom0/domU kernel - kernel-5.15.72 (from Yocto), Kernel-5.10.0-22 (from > > > Debian) > > > > > > rootfs - alpine-minirootfs-3.15.1-armhf.tar.gz > > > > > > firmware - U-Boot 2022.10 > > > > > > 11. Testing tools for x86 > > > > > > compiler - gcc-9.3.0 (Alpine Linux 9.3.0), gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0, > > > clang (from Debian) (most commonly used version) > > > > > > binutils - GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40) > > > > > > emulator/hardware - Qubes HW (**need details regarding machine, firmware, > > > etc**) , qemu 6.2.0 (From yocto, poky distro - 4.0.5) > > > > > > dom0/domU kernel - kernel 6.1.19 > > > > > > rootfs - alpine-3.12-rootfs > > > > > > firmware - BIOS Dasharo (coreboot+UEFI) v1.1.1 02/22/2023 , EFI v2.70 by > > > EDK > > > II , SMBIOS 3.3.0 , SeaBIOS (version rel-1.16.2-0-gea1b7a0-Xen), GRUB > > > 2.06~rc1 > > I do use an LLVM based toolstack, so that's usually latest LLVM import > > on FreeBSD. We do also test this on the cirrus-ci, see: > > > > https://github.com/royger/xen/runs/5334480206 > > Thanks, this is interesting info. > > For the moment, I am ignoring the downstream forks of Xen. That's not a fork of Xen, just plain Xen hosted on my personal github repo. > I am only considering the tools used by the upstream Xen and the associated > CI/CD. Gitlab CI does test with LLVM toolchain also. osstest does test FreeBSD guests, but no FreeBSD dom0. > > > > I_n any case I think the scope to some of the questions is unknown, > > it's not feasible to expect to list every possible combination of > > Linux versions vs Xen version vs whatever guests versions a given > > developer might be running. > > I agree . That is the reason I am picking up the compiler, linux, binutils, > firmware, etc versions from our gitlab CI. > > It also acts as a proof that we are testing Xen against a known set of > compiler, linux versions, etc. OK, so the question is not what every developers uses, but you trying to narrow down the scope to a specific environment? Maybe what you want to do is create a specific container in the Gitlab CI that has the specific tools versions you care about from a safety certify angle. Regards, Roger.
