From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07E8ABD8 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2017 16:28:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from esa4.hgst.iphmx.com (esa4.hgst.iphmx.com [216.71.154.42]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 667C116F for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2017 16:28:13 +0000 (UTC) From: Bart Van Assche To: "andrew@lunn.ch" , "leon@kernel.org" Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 16:28:04 +0000 Message-ID: <1500049683.2662.6.camel@wdc.com> References: <1498758126.2834.70.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20170629182044.GP21846@wotan.suse.de> <20170630062717.534b06e9@canb.auug.org.au> <20170714040447.GT1528@mtr-leonro.local> <20170714095409.GF2269@kroah.com> <20170714102920.GY1528@mtr-leonro.local> <20170714141057.GC21743@lunn.ch> <20170714153544.GE1528@mtr-leonro.local> <20170714161824.GJ21743@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20170714161824.GJ21743@lunn.ch> Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: <374D3C05A6C2CC498D19E9851D1BF57F@namprd04.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com" , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Developing across multiple areas of the kernel List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 2017-07-14 at 18:18 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 06:35:44PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 04:10:57PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > > The difference in maintainers style between netdev and RDMA causes = to have long queue > > > > (100+) of patches posted to the ML [2], which are not cross-checked= in various CIs. > > >=20 > > > It is possible to get 0-day to run against any arbitrary git tree, if > > > you ask nicely. If same is true for the kernel-ci project. So if you > > > are willing to do the merge work, you can get it tested. > >=20 > > 0-day is checking my tree, so it is not the problem. > >=20 > > I don't see how kernel-ci can help me, because RDMA requires special > > hardware to run it and it usually requires more than two endpoints (ser= vers) > > connected together. >=20 > kernel-ci are happy to receive hardware. I've sent them boards in the > past which have been added to their test farm. Kernel-ci is mostly > about boot testing, but they do do some tests post boot. So if you can > supply tests as well, they may run them for you. >=20 > > My problem is related to changes in other trees for example netdev, whi= ch > > can break RDMA functionality. > >=20 > > Technology wise, there are: > > 1. RoCE - RDMA over Converged Ethernet - netdev is below RDMA > > 2. IPoIB - IP over Infiniband - netdev is above RDMA > > 3. HFI-VNIC - Ethernet over OmniPath - netdev is above RDMA > > 4. iWARP - RDMA over IP networks >=20 > How much of this do you already have automated test for? You can also > setup your own test farm, using the kernels kernel-ci builds. Hello Andrew, The srp-test software is fully automated. It requires IB hardware today but= does not require a second server because it uses IB loopback. As soon as I have = the time I will add RoCE support to the upstream SRP initiator and target drivers su= ch that these tests can be run on top of Ethernet hardware. Please let me know if y= ou would like to start using this software and if you need help. See also https://github.com/bvanassche/srp-test. Bart.=