On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 11:05:21AM -0500, Aaron Conole wrote: > Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com> writes: > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Aaron Conole <acon...@redhat.com> > >> Sent: Monday, January 6, 2020 21:34 > >> To: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com> > >> Cc: maicolgabr...@hotmail.com; tho...@monjalon.net; > >> ferruh.yi...@intel.com; arybche...@solarflare.com; dev@dpdk.org; > >> david.march...@redhat.com; Gavin Hu <gavin...@arm.com>; Honnappa > >> Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com> > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ci: add travis ci support for aarch64 > >> > >> Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com> writes: > >> > >> > Add Travis compilation jobs for aarch64. gcc/clang compilations for > >> > static/shared libraries are added. > >> > > >> > Some limitations for current aarch64 Travis support: > >> > 1. Container is used. Huge page is not available due to security reason. > >> > 2. Missing kernel header package in Xenial distribution. > >> > > >> > Solutions to address the limitations: > >> > 1. Not to add unit test for now. And run tests with no-huge in future. > >> > 2. Use Bionic distribution for all aarch64 jobs. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com> > >> > Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin...@arm.com> > >> > --- > >> > >> Can't we achieve the same thing by setting > >> > >> arch: > >> - amd64 > >> - arm64 > >> > >> in the build matrix? Or will that also force the intel builds to use the > >> container > >> infrastructure (in which case the no-huge support needs to be fixed)? > > > > No, container infrastructure will not be imposed to intel builds. > > AFAIN, Travis infrastructure for a specific CPU arch is provided as > > is, and there is no config option to control. > > The problem with just adding 'arch' in build matrix is that RUN_TESTS on > > arm64 is not supported > > by now (Travis limitation). 'env' with RUN_TESTS will fail. > > Okay I see. > > >> > >> One thing I wonder, isn't is possible to use qemu-user to do the amd64 unit > >> tests? Then do we really need some changes to do the native build? > > > > Do you mean to use qemu-user to do unit tests for non-x86 arch? > > Yes. This has the advantage of giving users a way to also do the > multi-arch checks on their own systems (so a developer with just an x86 > could at least do some testing on arm or ppc). > > > Changes will be needed as well to enable qemu-user to do unit test. > > Since Travis support multi CPU arch, I think native build and test is > > simpler and more natural. > > I agree, some script changes might be needed, but maybe not as many as > you fear (can't we use binfmt_misc infrastructure to do this with > qemu-user and then the actual 'execute' would work). > > >> Does it buy us anything *today* given the cost of the hugepage restriction? > >> Will that ever be resolved (I didn't see so from the docs on travis)? > > > > The hugepage issue has been reported to Travis. I think it will be > > resolved. But no set dates yet. > > Is there a plan for them to address? I guess probably not. So we > either need the ability for tests to run in the no-huge environment (and > detect that no hugepages are available to run the tests that way), or we > need the travis environment supporting hugepages. Is there something I > missed? > I think a reasonable number of tests should already run in a no-huge environment. Ideally we could have autotest detect the fact it's running with no-huge and skip all unsupported tests, but I think that would be quite a bit of work to undertake, given the number of tests there are.
/Bruce
