Re: [Xen-devel] [OSSTEST PATCH] README.hardware-acquisition [and 1 more messages] [and 2 more messages] [and 2 more messages]

[Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Julien Grall writes ("Re: [OSSTEST PATCH] README.hardware-acquisition [and 1 
more messages] [and 2 more messages] [and 2 more messages]"):
> On 02/11/2018 15:05, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I guess that's probably tolerable.  We'd have to think about whether
> > we should snapshot them, or install them directly from upstream.  The
> > latter is less coding effort in osstest (just add an apt source and
> > run the install rune I guess) but it would imply tracking these in an
> > uncontrolled way, so we would want to be confident that they are
> > maintained to a high standard, since problems with the compiler would
> > break everything for us.  Also I would ask: how reliable is their apt
> > repository hosting ?  If it goes down, likewise, everything would
> > break for us.
> 
> Linaro hosting is pretty reliable. But AFAIK, they don't have an apt repo for 
> the toolchains. We would need to download a tarball and unpack it.

That would be doable.  If the tarballs have versions we could put the
version number in the osstest config and then it would be push gated.

> > Perhaps Julien has time to do that.
> 
> Arm64 cross-compiler in Debian should be suitable enough for building the 
> kernel. If there are any issue with them, then a bug report should be filled.

OK, that's definitely going to be easier then.

> My preference is to avoid cross-compiling if we can. This would avoid to use 
> x86 
> resource for building kernel that could be re-used for testing Xen itself.

We have more x86 capacity and are deploying some dedicated build
hosts.  But cross-compilation is more complex (particularly the
compiler conflict...)

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel