From: Lei Yu <yulei.sh@bytedance.com>
To: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Cc: openbmc <openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Thang Nguyen <thang@amperemail.onmicrosoft.com>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: New test for patches in openbmc/openbmc
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2021 10:18:04 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGm54UHq33wD5Fm6D59Mq=XwFrQvXQ0qdbV-CSRwNLuyfj06hg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAH2-KxCSosmLTXM2=m=cuG6X8=_MUW30ZgYEfbhGvdJXhWs-pg@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Oct 9, 2021 at 1:35 AM Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 1:31 AM Lei YU <mine260309@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > It's noticed that the `repotest` is enabled in CI and we got CI
> > failure due to node-manager's patch:
> > https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/openbmc/+/47673
> >
> > I know the right way is to ask Intel to upstream the node-manager and
> > fix the issues we met.
> > But in reality it's not easy and it takes time for Intel to upstream a
> > repo (and it depends on Intel to decide whether or not to upstream)
>
> If this is something you need, there's no need to wait for Intel, as
> that application already has an Apache 2 license. You are free to
> upstream it and maintain it yourself if you don't want to wait for
> intel.
>
> >
> >
> > @Ed Do we really want to reject such patches?
>
> I don't want to reject patches, I want to see them on master in a way
> that things can be changed as needs evolve. This patch is a perfect
> example of something that, had we taken the small amount of time to
> upstream this small daemon, wouldn't have even been an issue now as
> sdbusplus needs to make a very minor change. As-is, we're effectively
Totally agree. We have already asked Intel to upstream the
node-manager, let's wait for the feedback.
> 2 levels of fork deep (openbmc upstream -> intel-bmc -> openbmc
> upstream only for bytedance systems, which is the source of the
> problem, not this patch itself.
True. But as an Intel x86 platform, the repo is needed and in the
current state, the patch has to be added. Otherwise the g220a build is
broken.
Is it OK to ignore the repotest CI failure and just merge the patch in
meta-bytedance layer?
(Be noted that it's not trying to make a bad example, but only trying
to fix the broken build)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-09 2:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-21 22:35 New test for patches in openbmc/openbmc Ed Tanous
2021-09-22 9:02 ` Alexander Amelkin
2021-09-22 13:15 ` Verdun, Jean-Marie
2021-09-22 23:35 ` Oskar Senft
2021-09-23 2:49 ` John Broadbent
2021-09-23 17:09 ` Benjamin Fair
2021-09-23 23:57 ` Ed Tanous
2021-09-23 23:38 ` Ed Tanous
2021-09-24 10:28 ` Thang Nguyen
2021-09-24 11:06 ` [External] " Lei Yu
2021-09-27 16:33 ` Ed Tanous
2021-09-28 8:36 ` Lei Yu
2021-10-08 8:32 ` Lei YU
2021-10-08 17:35 ` Ed Tanous
2021-10-09 2:18 ` Lei Yu [this message]
2021-10-11 17:47 ` Ed Tanous
2021-09-27 16:39 ` Ed Tanous
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAGm54UHq33wD5Fm6D59Mq=XwFrQvXQ0qdbV-CSRwNLuyfj06hg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=yulei.sh@bytedance.com \
--cc=edtanous@google.com \
--cc=openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=thang@amperemail.onmicrosoft.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).