Le samedi 29 février 2020 à 15:54 -0600, Jason Ekstrand a écrit :
> On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 3:47 PM Timur Kristóf <timur.kristof@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-02-29 at 14:46 -0500, Nicolas Dufresne wrote:
> > > > 1. I think we should completely disable running the CI on MRs which
> > > > are
> > > > marked WIP. Speaking from personal experience, I usually make a lot
> > > > of
> > > > changes to my MRs before they are merged, so it is a waste of CI
> > > > resources.
> > >
> > > In the mean time, you can help by taking the habit to use:
> > >
> > > git push -o ci.skip
> >
> > Thanks for the advice, I wasn't aware such an option exists. Does this
> > also work on the mesa gitlab or is this a GStreamer only thing?
>
> Mesa is already set up so that it only runs on MRs and branches named
> ci-* (or maybe it's ci/*; I can't remember).
>
> > How hard would it be to make this the default?
>
> I strongly suggest looking at how Mesa does it and doing that in
> GStreamer if you can. It seems to work pretty well in Mesa.
You are right, they added CI_MERGE_REQUEST_SOURCE_BRANCH_NAME in 11.6
(we started our CI a while ago). But there is even better now, ou can
do:
only:
refs:
- merge_requests
Thanks for the hint, I'll suggest that. I've lookup some of the backend
of mesa, I think it's really nice, though there is a lot of concept
that won't work in a multi-repo CI. Again, I need to refresh on what
was moved from the enterprise to the community version in this regard,
>
> --Jason
>
>
> > > That's a much more difficult goal then it looks like. Let each
> > > projects
> > > manage their CI graph and content, as each case is unique. Running
> > > more
> > > tests, or building more code isn't the main issue as the CPU time is
> > > mostly sponsored. The data transfers between the cloud of gitlab and
> > > the runners (which are external), along to sending OS image to Lava
> > > labs is what is likely the most expensive.
> > >
> > > As it was already mention in the thread, what we are missing now, and
> > > being worked on, is per group/project statistics that give us the
> > > hotspot so we can better target the optimization work.
> >
> > Yes, would be nice to know what the hotspot is, indeed.
> >
> > As far as I understand, the problem is not CI itself, but the bandwidth
> > needed by the build artifacts, right? Would it be possible to not host
> > the build artifacts on the gitlab, but rather only the place where the
> > build actually happened? Or at least, only transfer the build artifacts
> > on-demand?
> >
> > I'm not exactly familiar with how the system works, so sorry if this is
> > a silly question.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mesa-dev mailing list
> > mesa-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
