[Mesa-dev] [Intel-gfx] gitlab.fd.o financial situation and impact on services

[Rob Clark]

On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 11:16 AM Rob Clark <robdclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 10:47 AM Nicolas Dufresne <nicolas at ndufresne.ca> wrote:
> >
> > Le samedi 04 avril 2020 à 08:11 -0700, Rob Clark a écrit :
> > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 7:12 AM Michel Dänzer <michel at daenzer.net> wrote:
> > > > On 2020-03-01 6:46 a.m., Marek Olšák wrote:
> > > > > For Mesa, we could run CI only when Marge pushes, so that it's a strictly
> > > > > pre-merge CI.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the suggestion! I implemented something like this for Mesa:
> > > >
> > > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/merge_requests/4432
> > > >
> > >
> > > I wouldn't mind manually triggering pipelines, but unless there is
> > > some trick I'm not realizing, it is super cumbersome.  Ie. you have to
> > > click first the container jobs.. then wait.. then the build jobs..
> > > then wait some more.. and then finally the actual runners.  That would
> > > be a real step back in terms of usefulness of CI.. one might call it a
> > > regression :-(
> >
> > On GStreamer side we have moved some existing pipeline to manual mode.
> > As we use needs: between jobs, we could simply set the first job to
> > manual (in our case it's a single job called manifest in your case it
> > would be the N container jobs). This way you can have a manual pipeline
> > that is triggered in single (or fewer) clicks. Here's an example:
> >
> > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/gstreamer/gstreamer/pipelines/128292
> >
> > That our post-merge pipelines, we only trigger then if we suspect a
> > problem.
> >
>
> I'm not sure that would work for mesa since the hierarchy of jobs
> branches out pretty far.. ie. if I just clicked the arm64 build + test
> container jobs, and everything else ran automatically after that, it
> would end up running all the CI jobs for all the arm devices (or at
> least all the 64b ones)

update: pepp pointed out on #dri-devel that the path-based rules
should still apply to prune out hw CI jobs for hw not affected by the
MR.  If that is the case, and we only need to click the container jobs
(without then doing the wait&click dance), then this doesn't sound as
bad as I feared.

BR,
-R