Re: wireguard ci hooked up to quite a few kernel trees

[dvn <mail@dvn.me>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2696 bytes --]

Hi Jason,

Impressed by how comprehensive this is already. Would you be up for
sharing some of the details of how this system works. Looks like it's
largely custom. Obviously based on QEMU/KVM, as you say - are you
emulating most of the architectures outside of x86_64?

Good to see a project taking continuous building/testing against
multiple trees and architectures so seriously!

Cheers,
Devan

Jason A. Donenfeld transcribed 2.0K bytes:
> Hi all,
> 
> With the merging of wireguard, I've hooked the project's CI up to
> quite a few trees. We now have:
> 
> - net-next
> - net
> - linux-next
> - linux (Linus' tree)
> - wireguard-linux (my tree)
> - wireguard-linux-compat (backports to kernels 3.10 - 5.5)
> 
> When the various pushes and pulls click a few more cranks through the
> machinery, I'll probably add crypto and cryptodev, and eventually
> Greg's stable trees. If anybody has suggestions on other relevant
> trees that might help catch bugs as early as possible, I'm all ears.
> 
> Right now builds are kicked off for every single commit made to each
> one of these trees, on x86_64, i686, aarch64, aarch64_be, arm, armeb,
> mips64, mips64el, mips, mipsel, powerpc64le, powerpc, and m68k. For
> each of these, a fresh kernel and miniature userland containing the
> test suite is built from source, and then booted in qemu.
> 
> Even though the CI at the moment is focused on the wireguard test
> suite, it has a habit of finding lots of bugs and regressions in other
> weird places. For example, linux-next is failing at the moment on a
> few archs.
> 
> I run this locally every day all day while developing kernel things
> too. It's one command to test a full kernel for whatever thing I'm
> working on, and this winds up saving a lot of time in development and
> lets me debug things with printk in the dumbest ways possible while
> still being productive and efficient.
> 
> You can view the current build status here:
> https://www.wireguard.com/build-status/
> 
> This sort of CI is another take on the kernel CI problem; I know a few
> organizations are doing similar things. I'd be happy to eventually
> expand this into something more general, should there be sufficient
> interest -- probably initially on networking stuff -- or it might turn
> out that this simply inspires something else that is more general and
> robust, which is fine too. Either way, here's my contribution to the
> modicum of kernel CI things happening.
> 
> Regards,
> Jason
> _______________________________________________
> WireGuard mailing list
> WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
> https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 148 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
WireGuard mailing list
WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard