Re: [PATCH 0/3] fix build failures from incorrectly skipped container build jobs

[Stefan Weil]

Am 08.02.21 um 19:12 schrieb Daniel P. Berrangé:

> On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 07:08:39PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > On 2/8/21 6:22 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 04:33:36PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > > This series fixes a problem with our gitlab CI rules that cause
> > > > container builds to be skipped. See the commit description in the
> > > > first patch for the details on this problem.
> > > >
> > > > The overall result of this series though is a small increase in overall
> > > > pipeline time.
> > > >
> > > > Previously
> > > >
> > > >   - When container jobs are skipped: approx 1hr 5 mins
> > > >   - When container jobs are run, cached by docker: approx 1hr 15 mins
> > > >   - When container jobs are run, not cached by docker: approx 1hr 30 mins
> > > >
> > > > With this series applied the first scenario no longer exists, so
> > > > all piplines are either 1hr 15 or 1hr 30 depending on whether the
> > > > container phase is skipped.
> > > I mean to say the biggest problem I see is the cross-win64-system
> > > job. This consumes 1 hour 5 minutes all on its own. It is at least
> > > 15 minutes longer that every other job AFAICT. So no matter how
> > > well we parallelize stuff, 1 hr 5 is a hard lower limit on pipeline
> > > duration right now.
> > >
> > > We might want to consider how to split the win64 job or cut down
> > > what it does in some way ?
> > When the win64 build was added (on Debian), it was to mostly to cover
> > the WHPX. Later we moved mingw jobs to Fedora. I just checked and
> > WHPX is no more built, and nobody complained, so it is not relevant
> > anymore.
> >
> > I don't mind much what you do with the Gitlab win64 job, as this config
> > is better covered on Cirrus. I'd like to keep the win32 job because it
> > has been useful to catch 32-bit issues.
> I'm not suggesting we remove it. Most developers won't setup Cirrus CI,
> so will only run GitLab CI jobs.  IME it is good to have both win32
> and win64 coverage because things do break differently on them - especially
> if you use bad printf format strings that are not independant of host
> word size


I would not say that something is not relevant just because nobody 
complains. Nobody would miss any CI if everything were always fine. So 
people would miss WHPX CI as soon as there are changes (which happen 
infrequently) and something breaks. WHPX should be covered by the w64 
build, and as many as possible other features where I currently see a 
"NO" in the configure output as well.

Nevertheless I don't think that each CI job must run frequently. Each 
run not only costs time, but also energy, and contributes to our climate 
change.

I think that for the win32 and win64 jobs it would be sufficient to run 
them weekly, maybe even alternating if that is possible.

Stefan