Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-86402-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Message-ID: <5d7ed81b-37f9-48e9-ab7e-484b74ca886c@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 11:23:22 +0200
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kci-gitlab: Introducing GitLab-CI Pipeline for Kernel
 Testing
Content-Language: en-US
To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
 Helen Koike <helen.koike@collabora.com>
Cc: linuxtv-ci@linuxtv.org, dave.pigott@collabora.com,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
 linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, gustavo.padovan@collabora.com,
 pawiecz@collabora.com, tales.aparecida@gmail.com, workflows@vger.kernel.org,
 kernelci@lists.linux.dev, skhan@linuxfoundation.org,
 kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, nfraprado@collabora.com, davidgow@google.com,
 cocci@inria.fr, Julia.Lawall@inria.fr, laura.nao@collabora.com,
 ricardo.canuelo@collabora.com, kernel@collabora.com,
 torvalds@linuxfoundation.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
References: <20240228225527.1052240-1-helen.koike@collabora.com>
 <20240228225527.1052240-2-helen.koike@collabora.com>
 <20240229-dancing-laughing-groundhog-d85161@houat>
From: Nikolai Kondrashov <spbnick@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240229-dancing-laughing-groundhog-d85161@houat>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi everyone,

On 2/29/24 11:02, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 07:55:25PM -0300, Helen Koike wrote:
>> Which rating would you select?
> 
> 4.5 :)
> 
> One thing I'm wondering here is how we're going to cope with the
> different requirements each user / framework has.
> 
> Like, Linus probably want to have a different set of CI before merging a
> PR than (say) linux-next does, or stable, or before doing an actual
> release.
> 
> Similarly, DRM probably has a different set of requirements than
> drm-misc, drm-amd or nouveau.
> 
> I don't see how the current architecture could accomodate for that. I
> know that Gitlab allows to store issues template in a separate repo,
> maybe we could ask them to provide a feature where the actions would be
> separate from the main repo? That way, any gitlab project could provide
> its own set of tests, without conflicting with each others (and we could
> still share them if we wanted to)
> 
> I know some of use had good relationship with Gitlab, so maybe it would
> be worth asking?

GitLab already supports getting the CI YAML from other repos. You can change 
that in the repo settings.

However, I think a better approach would be *not* to add the .gitlab-ci.yaml 
file in the root of the source tree, but instead change the very same repo 
setting to point to a particular entry YAML, *inside* the repo (somewhere 
under "ci" directory) instead.

This way all the different subtrees can have completely different setup, but 
some could still use Helen's work and employ the "scenarios" she implemented.

Nick