Re: [RFC] GitLab issue tracker labeling process: arch/target, os, and accel labels - Philippe Mathieu-Daudé

From: "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <f4bug@amsat.org>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>, John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>,
	QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Cc: "Peter Maydell" <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	"David Hildenbrand" <david@redhat.com>,
	"Bin Meng" <bin.meng@windriver.com>,
	"Mark Cave-Ayland" <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>,
	"Max Filippov" <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
	"Taylor Simpson" <tsimpson@quicinc.com>,
	"Alistair Francis" <alistair.francis@wdc.com>,
	"Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@gmail.com>,
	"Marek Vasut" <marex@denx.de>,
	"Yoshinori Sato" <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
	"Kamil Rytarowski" <kamil@netbsd.org>,
	"Reinoud Zandijk" <reinoud@netbsd.org>,
	"Artyom Tarasenko" <atar4qemu@gmail.com>,
	"Eduardo Habkost" <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
	"Stefan Weil" <sw@weilnetz.de>,
	"Richard Henderson" <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
	"Greg Kurz" <groug@kaod.org>,
	"Michael Rolnik" <mrolnik@gmail.com>,
	"Stafford Horne" <shorne@gmail.com>,
	"Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>,
	"David Gibson" <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>,
	"Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>,
	"Bastian Koppelmann" <kbastian@mail.uni-paderborn.de>,
	"Chris Wulff" <crwulff@gmail.com>,
	"Laurent Vivier" <laurent@vivier.eu>,
	"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] GitLab issue tracker labeling process: arch/target, os, and accel labels
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 16:03:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fc007943-ffcc-1e14-aee6-ee6e4d43280c@amsat.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50c71eb7-02ba-a7a9-9ed3-a1908cc832e7@redhat.com>

On 6/15/21 10:56 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 14/06/2021 19.32, John Snow wrote:
> [...]
>> RTH raises the issue of the "TCI" subsystem of TCG, which is not a
>> full accelerator in its own right, but (I think) a special case of
>> TCG. If I keep the 1:1 mapping to ACCEL_CLASS_NAME, "accel: TCI" is
>> inappropriate.
>>
>> Some suggestions:
>> - "TCI" by itself, simple enough.
>> - "TCG-TCI" or "TCG: TCI" or "TCG/TCI" or similar, so that it shows up
>> in label search when you search for 'tcg'.
>> - "accel: TCG:TCI". Similar to above but uses the "accel:" prefix too.
> 
> I wonder whether we need a label for TCI at all... I can't recall having
> ever seen a bug ticket filed for TCI. It's quite a special use-case with
> some few users only, so it's maybe not worth the effort to create a
> separate label for this... just my 0.02 €.
> 
>> We probably want to keep a set of labels that apply to the host
>> architecture. These are useful for build failures, environment setup
>> issues, or just documenting the exact environment on which an issue
>> was observed.
>>
>> We won't likely require the full set of targets to be duplicated for
>> this purpose: possibly just the most common ones. I assume those are:
>>
>> arm, i386, ppc, s390x
>>
>> How should we tag those? "host-arch: XXX"?
> 
> "host-arch" sounds fine to me. I think you can limit the selection here
> to the list of TCG backends that we support:
> 
>  arm, i386, mips, ppc, riscv, s390x, sparc
> 
> ... and maybe tci here (i.e. "host-arch: tci")?

Great idea!