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
