-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 169
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
new(ci): enable kernel testing on PRs. #1935
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Federico Di Pierro <[email protected]>
/milestone 0.18.0 NOTE: i want to also add a comment on the PR with the results :) |
Perf diff from master - unit tests
Perf diff from master - scap file
Heap diff from master - unit tests
Heap diff from master - scap file
|
Signed-off-by: Federico Di Pierro <[email protected]>
2713641
to
c179fe3
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Same as create-comment.yml for perf but with diffeernt workflow_run trigger.
@@ -185,7 +185,7 @@ jobs: | |||
run: echo "GIT_BRANCH=${GITHUB_HEAD_REF:-${GITHUB_REF#refs/heads/}}" >> $GITHUB_ENV | |||
|
|||
- name: Build and test drivers on ppc64le node via ssh | |||
if: needs.paths-filter.outputs.driver_needs_rebuild | |||
if: needs.paths-filter.outputs.driver == 'true' || needs.paths-filter.outputs.libscap == 'true' || needs.paths-filter.outputs.libpman == 'true' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is a fix :)
libsversion: ${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha }} | ||
secrets: inherit | ||
|
||
kernel-tests-upload: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Once kernel-tests-dev finish, a new job will take care of uploading PR comment and info to be used by the matching create-comment.
Note: reusable_workflows do not support running as step, only job-wide ;)
echo ${{ github.event.number }} > ./pr/NR | ||
touch ./pr/COMMENT | ||
echo "# X64 kernel testing matrix" >> ./pr/COMMENT | ||
echo "$(head -n $(grep -n -v -m1 '^|' matrix_X64/matrix.md | awk -F':' '{ print $1 }') matrix_X64/matrix.md)" >> ./pr/COMMENT |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Magic to get the first line that does not start with |
, and head
until it, so that we only print matrixes and not errors (full matrixes are still available as artifacts though).
Perf diff from master - unit tests
Perf diff from master - scap file
Heap diff from master - unit tests
Heap diff from master - scap file
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/approve
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/approve
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Andreagit97, FedeDP, incertum The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
Any specific area of the project related to this PR?
/area CI
Does this PR require a change in the driver versions?
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR enables kernel-testing framework on PRs.
I discovered that, for self hosted runners, there is no parallelism: each job's request is enqueued.
The only parallelism would happen if we had multiple self hosted runners under same tags, then the jobs would be distributed among them.
See https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/26769#discussioncomment-3253321
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: