On 20.06.2019 15:10, Ilya Maximets wrote: > On 20.06.2019 14:56, Stokes, Ian wrote: >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:ovs-dev- >>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Stokes, Ian >>>> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 11:53 AM >>>> To: Ilya Maximets <[email protected]>; David Marchand >>>> <[email protected]> >>>> Cc: ovs dev <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] travis: Make it possible to build >>>> against a dpdk branch. >>>> >>>>> On 19.06.2019 14:35, David Marchand wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 1:22 PM Ilya Maximets >>> <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 19.06.2019 10:26, David Marchand wrote: >>>>>> > Rework the build script so that we can pass branches and tags. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > With this, DPDK_VER can be passed as: >>>>>> > - a string starting with refs/ which is understood as a git >>>>> reference. >>>>>> > This triggers a git clone on DPDK_GIT (default value points >>> to >>>>>> > https://dpdk.org/git/dpdk) for a single branch pointing to >>>> this >>>>>> > reference (to save some disk), >>>>>> > - else, any other string which is understood as an official >>>>> release. >>>>>> > This triggers a tarball download on dpdk.org >>>> <http://dpdk.org>. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Signed-off-by: David Marchand <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>>> > --- >>>>>> > Changelog since v1: >>>>>> > - removed (now unneeded) directory renames >>>>>> > - added a "git log" so that we have the current git revision >>> in >>>>> the logs >>>>>> > >>>>>> > --- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>> >>>>>> I tested this patch with: >>>>>> >>>>>> - DPDK=1 DPDK_GIT="https://dpdk.org/git/dpdk-stable"; >>>>> DPDK_VER="refs/heads/18.11" >>>>>> >>>>>> and >>>>>> >>>>>> - DPDK=1 DPDK_VER="refs/heads/master" >>>>>> >>>>>> Works fine. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks Ilya. >>>>>> >>>>>> I could have detailed my non-reg tests: >>>>>> - DPDK=1 >>>>>> - DPDK=1 DPDK_VER=18.11.2 >>>>>> - DPDK=1 DPDK_VER=refs/tags/v18.11.2 >>>> DPDK_GIT=http://dpdk.org/git/dpdk- >>>>> stable >>>>>> - DPDK=1 DPDK_VER=refs/heads/18.11 >>> DPDK_GIT=http://dpdk.org/git/dpdk- >>>>> stable >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So, I pushed this and the previous patch to master. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cool, so I suppose you will handle the changes on dpdk-latest, >>> right? >>>>> >>>>> Not sure. Ian managed these branches (hwol, latest) previously. >>>>> >>>>> Ian, will you rebase dpdk-latest onto current master? >>>> >>>> Yes, I'll look at this today. I know when I look last week there were a >>>> few conflicts to be resolved. So will sort these. >>> >>> Hi Ilya, just started looking at this again, are yu sure it's a rebase we >>> want here i.e. rebase dpdk-latest on master? >>> >>> Essentially we what I'm seeing is as the dpdk-latest changes are being >>> applied ontop of the least master history all the previous changes in >>> dpdk-latest have to re-applied include changes such as upgrade to 18.08 >>> etc. it's just making it a bit messy, especially with some of the HOWL >>> changes we've had on master. > > > Actually, these patches: > > 7f021f902bb3 ("netdev-dpdk: Upgrade to dpdk v18.08") > 270d9216f1ed ("netdev-dpdk: Set scatter based on capabilities") > bef2cdc8f412 ("netdev-dpdk: Fix returning the field of malloced struct.") > 73c1a65167fc ("redhat: change variable used for non-root user support") > eb485f60ce44 ("dpdk: Update to use DPDK 18.11.") > > was already incorporated into: > > 03f3f9c0faf8 ("dpdk: Update to use DPDK 18.11.") > > So, could be just skipped while rebasing. > IIUC, in the end there should be only 2 patches on top of master. > One for meter color and one for rte_ prefix. > >>> >>> I'm also think would it not require a force push to the dpdk-latest >>> branch? The re-write of the commit history will change etc. > > Yes, this will require the force-push. > >>> >>> I know the merge process wasn't ideal from a commit history POV but it did >>> avoid issues such as this in the past. What are your thoughts? >> >> To provide a better example, what I mean would be if you look at the commit >> for moving to 18.11 on master, in the commit message we actually use commit >> IDs form commits to dpdk-latest to reference and help accredit the >> authorship of work. If we rebase dpdk-latest with master, these commit ID's >> change in the dpdk-latest branch, meaning in master we have incorrect commit >> ID etc. in the commit message. >> >> I guess that’s what I was trying to avoid with the rebase approach and hence >> why I had used the merge approach (similar to how we used to use dpdk-merge >> branches). >> >> Do you have a way around this? > > As David suggested we may tag current branch before rebase to not loose > the hashes. However, there was a simple squash of these commits and there > was no important information we could loose. For the future, we could > avoid such issues by using more permanent pointers like mail-list/patchwork > links instead of git hashes from different/unreliable branches. >
To be clear, I think that having cross-branch pointers in a git repo is a bad practice. >> >> Thanks >> Ian >>> >>> Ian >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> Ian >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, Ilya Maximets. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev > > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
