Hello all, Thanks for your comments. On Friday, July 28, 2023 11:37 -03, Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 10:26 PM Daniel Stone <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 27 Jul 2023 at 22:47, Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I did run into a bit of a chicken vs. egg problem with testing the "in > > > > tree" version (compared to earlier versions which kept most of the yml > > > > and scripts in a separate tree), is that it actually requires this > > > > commit to exist in the branch you want to run CI on. My earlier > > > > workaround of pulling the drm/ci commit in via > > > > ${branchname}-external-fixes no longer works. > > > > > > After unwinding some more gitlab repo settings that were for the > > > previous out-of-tree yml setup, I have this working. > > > > > > Tested-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Acked-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > And it's also: > > Acked-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > It's been back and forth a few times by now and reviewed pretty > > heavily by all the people who are across the CI details. I think the > > next step is to answer all the workflow questions by actually getting > > it into trees and using it in anger. There was some discussion about > > whether this should come in from drm-misc, or the core DRM tree, or a > > completely separate pull, but I'm not sure what the conclusion was ... > > maintainers, thoughts? > > I'd prefer a separate pull, so that I could merge it into msm-next as > well without having to pull in all of drm-misc Should we create a drm-ci ? > > Possibly some other driver trees would like to do similar? > > BR, > -R Also, please wait for v11, I have a few adjustments to make as pointer by some comments, and also regarding xfails list and how the configs should be organized (unless if you are fine merging this version and I can submit the adjustments later). Thanks, Helen