[ovs-dev] kernel module testing

[Ben Pfaff]

On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 04:18:08PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Kyle Mestery <mestery at mestery.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Ben Pfaff <blp at nicira.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 07:45:42AM +0000, Pritesh Kothari (pritkoth) wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > On Jul 13, 2015, at 9:40 PM, Ben Pfaff <blp at nicira.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 12:34:14AM +0000, Pritesh Kothari (pritkoth)
> >> wrote:
> >> > >> How about automating this using travis and gerrit, so no commit gets
> >> in
> >> > >> unless it passes sanity tests? This also simplifies review process as
> >> well.
> >> > >
> >> > > Travis doesn't test the kernel module, and as far as I know it can’t.
> >> >
> >> > weird, i saw one patch few days ago doing it [1], anyways I may be
> >> mistaken.
> >>
> >> It's fantastic if it does, but I don't think that it does:
> >>         https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/2291
> >>
> >> The link that you reference appears to be loading a kernel module inside
> >> a User-Mode Linux instance that it runs in travis.  That's an approach I
> >> hadn't considered; maybe it would work.
> >>
> >> > > I am the wrong person to evangelize Gerrit to:
> >> > >        http://benpfaff.org/writings/gerrit.html
> >> >
> >> > This seems to be all about web interface, any chance you happen to use
> >> the
> >> > cli for gerrit mainly git review [2] -d [3] or -m [3] or gerritmander
> >> [4]? both of
> >> > them are really good utilities and you never have to really leave your
> >> > command line tools to use them.
> >>
> >> Thanks for the information.  Whenever I've brought the issues on this
> >> page previously with people who use Gerrit, they've shrugged and said
> >> "Yeah, the UI and email sucks" but no one has ever actually pointed out
> >> specific ways to work around them with the CLI.  The CLIs aren't exactly
> >> promoted: https://www.gerritcodereview.com/ defines Gerrit by saying
> >> "Gerrit provides web based code review and repository management".  Now,
> >> if I have to deal with it, I'll know to go to the CLIs first.
> >>
> >
> > You're right that gerrit's CLI sucks rocks. This is the precise reason why
> > the OpenStack infra folks created gertty [1] which is a GREAT CLI interface
> > for gerrit. I'd encourage you to give it a try. I've found between this and
> > the customer gerrit dashboard creator [2] (also done by OpenStack infra
> > folks), gerrit is incredibly useable and I enjoy working with it.
> 
> For what it's worth, I also think that something like Gerrit would be
> useful given the number of platforms that OVS is running on. Right
> now, it's seems like we're doing the human-powered version, which is
> Guru, Daniele, or Ben complain when something breaks Windows, DPDK,
> 32-bit respectively. It also effectively provides the features of
> Patchwork in a way that is more maintainable.
> 
> I agree that the Gerrit UI sucks (I haven't tried the OpenStack
> interface) and maybe there are alternatives, like Github's set of
> tools. But I think the status quo that we have isn't all that great
> either and I also would like to avoid having a collection of
> independent tools that fall apart over time.

I'm happy to encourage people to submit changes via Github, as an
experiment.

I don't know of a way to experiment with Gerrit, because Gerrit wants
exclusive access to your repository.  There is a Gerrit service for
Github ("Gerrithub") but its docs say that you have to use it
exclusively (see https://review.gerrithub.io/static/intro.html):

    If you keep on pushing directly to GitHub you would cause the Gerrit
    replication process to stop: this is done for avoiding to overwrite
    the GitHub history because of the potential conflicts.