Re: [Xen-devel] [OSSTEST RFC PATCH 0/4] Nested job execution infrastructure

[Robert Hu <robert.hu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2015-06-30 at 17:36 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I think it would be best if I proposed some code to you.  I will get
> > back to you with a suggestion.
> 
> Here is the result.  Please let me know what you think.
> 
> NB that this is an RFC and I have NOT EXECUTED IT.  It is easy in Tcl
> to make daft mistakes like missing `global' or misspelling variable
> names, so I apologise in advance for the bugs.
> 
> 
> The first two patches are, I think, uncontroversial:
> 
>   1/4 Tcl: Provide lunappend
>   2/4 sg-run-job: Declare Tcl (for the benefit of Emacs)
> 
> The next one makes an assumption about how much you want to reuse of
> the standard host setup machinery.  I think you want to go back at
> least to ts-xen-install ?  In which case this is probably
> approximately correct.
> 
>   3/4 sg-run-job: Break out per-host-prep and per-host-finish
> 
> The final patch provides the functionality you will need for your proc
> run-job/test-nested:
> 
>   4/4 sg-run-job: Provide infrastructure for layers of nesting
> 
> You would use this by writing someething like this:
> 
>   proc run-job/test-nested {} {
>       run-ts . = ts-debian-hvm-install + host l1
>       run-ts . = ts-nested-setup + host l1
>       nested-layer-descend l1
>       run-ts . = ts-debian-hvm-install l1 l2
>       ...
> 
> And there is then no need to do anything special at the end of the
> test: the nested layering part will leak check and log capture the l1,
> tear it down, and then do the same to the l0.
> 
> 
> If you like the look of this approach, please feel free to fold these
> patches into your own series at the appropriate point (retaining my
> From: and S-o-b would be conventional).
Sure. Thanks Ian. 'S-o-b' is signed-off-by, right?
I'm afraid I'm busy on other stuff at present. I'll try them after
stuffs at hand are done; perhaps 2 weeks later. Sorry about this.
> 
> Before posting them other than as an RFC, you will have to test them,
> I'm afraid.  If it doesn't work and you can't figure it out please ask
> me and I will try to reply quickly.
> 
> When you have tested them, you can add your own Tested-by to the
> patch tags next to by Signed-off-by.
> 
> 
> I hope this is helpful.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ian.



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel