* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
[not found] ` <20160413092654.GE8847@redhat.com>
@ 2016-04-13 9:50 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-13 13:28 ` Wei Liu
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: George Dunlap @ 2016-04-13 9:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel P. Berrange
Cc: LibVirt Development List, Xen-devel, Jim Fehlig, Wei Liu, Ian Jackson
On 13/04/16 10:26, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 10:09:16AM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Jim Fehlig <jfehlig@suse.com> wrote:
>>> Wei Liu wrote:
>>>> Hi libvirt maintainers,
>>>
>>> Sorry for the delay. Slowly catching up on mail after vacation...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Xen's control library libxenlight (libxl) requires application
>>>> (libvirt in this case) to explictily define LIBXL_API_VERSION.
>>>
>>> Where is this requirement written? :-)
>>>
>>>> This is
>>>> lacking at the moment so libvirt's libxl driver always gets the latest
>>>> APIs.
>>>
>>> IMO, that is what we want for upstream libvirt. Downstreams can choose a
>>> specific version if they want.
>>
>> I think one of us isn't understanding the situation properly. Is it
>> not the case that currently, all releases of libvirt *will not
>> compile* against Xen 4.7 once it's released? So people downloading
>> and building libvirt will have to either 1) root around and try to
>> figure out what version of Xen it will build against, 2) manually add
>> in a #define *with the correct API version* to a header somewhere to
>> make it build properly, or 3) update to a version of libvirt that
>> supports the new api (which at the moment hasn't even been released
>> yet)?
>>
>> All of those options are completely unacceptable. Older versions of
>> libvirt should Just Work when compiled against newer versions of Xen.
>>
>> I think it does make sense to have the libvirt development branch not
>> specify an API version; but when it branches for release, it should
>> set LIBXL_API_VERSION to whatever the current version is at the time
>> of the branch.
>
> FYI, libvirt doesn't do branching for releases - we always just cut the
> release straight from the master branch. We only actually create branches
> on demand, when we find we want to backport fixes to a previous release.
>
> Does libvirt master really need to always use the latest API version ?
>
> It feels like libvirt could just set LIBXL_API_VERSION to the lowest
> version it requires in order to get the functionality we know we are
> able to currently build against. IOW, we'd only need to update the
> define for LIBXL_API_VERSION when we merge patches that actually need
> the newer functionality.
Oh, right -- yes, if that's the libvirt development model then it makes
more sense to do what works best with that model to make sure each
release has an appropriate LIBXL_API_VERSION.
On reflection, it's probably a better idea even from a Xen development
perspective. I was originally thinking that it would be nice to have
the testing automatically flag up an update in libxl that could use a
corresponding update in libvirt. But in practice, since we use these
tests as a push-gate, having changesets in the xen development branch
which break against libvirt master but require changes in libvirt master
to fix is actually causes a fair amount of hassle.
It might be useful for the XenProject to have a non-pushgate test which
tests libvirt without a LIBXL_API_VERSION, just to flag things up, but
that's something we can sort out on our side with a sed script.
Thanks,
-George
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
[not found] ` <20160413092654.GE8847@redhat.com>
2016-04-13 9:50 ` George Dunlap
@ 2016-04-13 13:28 ` Wei Liu
2016-04-13 23:44 ` Jim Fehlig
[not found] ` <570ED9DF.5070606@suse.com>
3 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Wei Liu @ 2016-04-13 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel P. Berrange
Cc: Wei Liu, LibVirt Development List, Ian Jackson, George Dunlap,
Jim Fehlig, Xen-devel
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 10:26:54AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 10:09:16AM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Jim Fehlig <jfehlig@suse.com> wrote:
> > > Wei Liu wrote:
> > >> Hi libvirt maintainers,
> > >
> > > Sorry for the delay. Slowly catching up on mail after vacation...
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Xen's control library libxenlight (libxl) requires application
> > >> (libvirt in this case) to explictily define LIBXL_API_VERSION.
> > >
> > > Where is this requirement written? :-)
> > >
> > >> This is
> > >> lacking at the moment so libvirt's libxl driver always gets the latest
> > >> APIs.
> > >
> > > IMO, that is what we want for upstream libvirt. Downstreams can choose a
> > > specific version if they want.
> >
> > I think one of us isn't understanding the situation properly. Is it
> > not the case that currently, all releases of libvirt *will not
> > compile* against Xen 4.7 once it's released? So people downloading
> > and building libvirt will have to either 1) root around and try to
> > figure out what version of Xen it will build against, 2) manually add
> > in a #define *with the correct API version* to a header somewhere to
> > make it build properly, or 3) update to a version of libvirt that
> > supports the new api (which at the moment hasn't even been released
> > yet)?
> >
> > All of those options are completely unacceptable. Older versions of
> > libvirt should Just Work when compiled against newer versions of Xen.
> >
> > I think it does make sense to have the libvirt development branch not
> > specify an API version; but when it branches for release, it should
> > set LIBXL_API_VERSION to whatever the current version is at the time
> > of the branch.
>
> FYI, libvirt doesn't do branching for releases - we always just cut the
> release straight from the master branch. We only actually create branches
> on demand, when we find we want to backport fixes to a previous release.
>
> Does libvirt master really need to always use the latest API version ?
>
No, it doesn't.
> It feels like libvirt could just set LIBXL_API_VERSION to the lowest
> version it requires in order to get the functionality we know we are
> able to currently build against. IOW, we'd only need to update the
> define for LIBXL_API_VERSION when we merge patches that actually need
> the newer functionality.
>
That's sensible.
Wei.
> Regards,
> Daniel
> --
> |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
> |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
> |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
> |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
[not found] ` <20160413092654.GE8847@redhat.com>
2016-04-13 9:50 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-13 13:28 ` Wei Liu
@ 2016-04-13 23:44 ` Jim Fehlig
[not found] ` <570ED9DF.5070606@suse.com>
3 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Jim Fehlig @ 2016-04-13 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel P. Berrange, George Dunlap
Cc: LibVirt Development List, Xen-devel, Wei Liu, Ian Jackson
On 04/13/2016 03:26 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 10:09:16AM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Jim Fehlig <jfehlig@suse.com> wrote:
>>> Wei Liu wrote:
>>>> Hi libvirt maintainers,
>>> Sorry for the delay. Slowly catching up on mail after vacation...
>>>
>>>> Xen's control library libxenlight (libxl) requires application
>>>> (libvirt in this case) to explictily define LIBXL_API_VERSION.
>>> Where is this requirement written? :-)
>>>
>>>> This is
>>>> lacking at the moment so libvirt's libxl driver always gets the latest
>>>> APIs.
>>> IMO, that is what we want for upstream libvirt. Downstreams can choose a
>>> specific version if they want.
>> I think one of us isn't understanding the situation properly. Is it
>> not the case that currently, all releases of libvirt *will not
>> compile* against Xen 4.7 once it's released? So people downloading
>> and building libvirt will have to either 1) root around and try to
>> figure out what version of Xen it will build against, 2) manually add
>> in a #define *with the correct API version* to a header somewhere to
>> make it build properly, or 3) update to a version of libvirt that
>> supports the new api (which at the moment hasn't even been released
>> yet)?
>>
>> All of those options are completely unacceptable. Older versions of
>> libvirt should Just Work when compiled against newer versions of Xen.
>>
>> I think it does make sense to have the libvirt development branch not
>> specify an API version; but when it branches for release, it should
>> set LIBXL_API_VERSION to whatever the current version is at the time
>> of the branch.
> FYI, libvirt doesn't do branching for releases - we always just cut the
> release straight from the master branch. We only actually create branches
> on demand, when we find we want to backport fixes to a previous release.
>
> Does libvirt master really need to always use the latest API version ?
>
> It feels like libvirt could just set LIBXL_API_VERSION to the lowest
> version it requires in order to get the functionality we know we are
> able to currently build against.
I think that is a good idea too. I've sent a patch setting LIBXL_API_VERSION to
0x040200
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-April/msg00771.html
Changes made to the APIs since 0x040200 (params added to
libxl_domain_create_restore and libxl_set_vcpuaffinity) are currently not used
by libvirt.
Regards,
Jim
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread[parent not found: <570ED9DF.5070606@suse.com>]
* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
[not found] ` <570ED9DF.5070606@suse.com>
@ 2016-06-27 15:33 ` Ian Jackson
2016-06-27 15:54 ` Ian Jackson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Ian Jackson @ 2016-06-27 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jim Fehlig
Cc: LibVirt Development List, Xen-devel, Daniel P. Berrange,
George Dunlap, Wei Liu
Jim Fehlig writes ("Re: [libvirt] [Xen-devel] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?"):
> I think that is a good idea too. I've sent a patch setting
> LIBXL_API_VERSION to 0x040200
>
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-April/msg00771.html
It seems that the libvirt LIBXL_API_VERSION is now rather higher, at
0x040400, since libvirt#fccf27253ced
libxl: switch to using libxl_domain_create_restore from v4.4 API
One unfortunate effect of this is to break the osstest tests of the
Xen 4.3 stable branch, which for the moment is still allegedly in
security support.
I can't really see a way that this kind of problem could be avoided
in principle, without
- providing a more sophisticated way for libxl callers to set the
requested version
- providing more compatibility code in libvirt, too, and retaining
it for some time
I think instead that it would probably be better for osstest to
"freeze" the version of libvirt that it is using, every time we branch
Xen.
So Xen 4.4 would be tested with whatever libvirt we were using when
the stable branch for Xen 4.4 was made, and so on.
Does that sound sensible ?
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
2016-06-27 15:33 ` Ian Jackson
@ 2016-06-27 15:54 ` Ian Jackson
2016-06-27 16:03 ` Daniel P. Berrange
0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Ian Jackson @ 2016-06-27 15:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jim Fehlig, Daniel P. Berrange, George Dunlap,
LibVirt Development List, Xen-devel, Wei Liu, Jan Beulich
(Adding Jan Beulich)
Ian Jackson writes ("Re: [libvirt] [Xen-devel] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?"):
> It seems that the libvirt LIBXL_API_VERSION is now rather higher, at
> 0x040400, since libvirt#fccf27253ced
> libxl: switch to using libxl_domain_create_restore from v4.4 API
>
> One unfortunate effect of this is to break the osstest tests of the
> Xen 4.3 stable branch, which for the moment is still allegedly in
> security support.
>
> I can't really see a way that this kind of problem could be avoided
> in principle, without
> - providing a more sophisticated way for libxl callers to set the
> requested version
> - providing more compatibility code in libvirt, too, and retaining
> it for some time
>
> I think instead that it would probably be better for osstest to
> "freeze" the version of libvirt that it is using, every time we branch
> Xen.
>
> So Xen 4.4 would be tested with whatever libvirt we were using when
> the stable branch for Xen 4.4 was made, and so on.
>
> Does that sound sensible ?
In the assumption that it is, I have:
Created the following branch refs on xenbits in the toplevel
libvirt.git:
osstest/frozen/xen-4.3-testing 9a0c7f5f834185db9017c34aabc03ad99cf37bed
osstest/frozen/xen-4.4-testing 33fb8ff185846a7b4974105d2c9400690a6f95cf
osstest/frozen/xen-4.5-testing cda1cc170f07b45911b3dad03e42c8ebfc210fa1
osstest/frozen/xen-4.6-testing eac167e2610d3e59b32f7ec7ba78cbc8c420a425
osstest/frozen/xen-4.7-testing 1a41ed5af5e1704dd9b0bdca40df5c9cacbdabfc
These were those tested by the following `tolerable' osstest push gate
flights for the corresponding Xen tree:
xen-4.3-testing 9a0c7f5f8341 86673
xen-4.4-testing 33fb8ff18584 85031
xen-4.5-testing cda1cc170f07 83135
xen-4.6-testing eac167e2610d 96031
xen-4.7-testing 1a41ed5af5e1 95728
And I have prepared the patch below, which (together with a
prerequisite, in my tree) will implement this in osstest.
Ian.
From 5d1c91d3c53b580305e96d62f8ca84f85f8d3011 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 16:49:52 +0100
Subject: [OSSTEST PATCH] cr-daily-branch: libvirt: use frozen version on
stable branches
libvirt master might increase its LIBXL_API_VERSION. When this feeds
through osstest it can cause the push gates of Xen stable branches to
break.
So for stable Xen branches do not track libvirt upstream. Instead,
use a frozen revision. (Only for main push gate tests of stable Xen
branches.)
The frozen branch is never going to be updated so it is not suitable
for other kinds of uses. In particular it won't get security fixes.
So we call the refs osstest/frozen/xen-K.L-testing to discourage
users from using them.
Deployment note: The Xen release checklist needs a new item "add this
frozen libvirt branch".
Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
---
cr-daily-branch | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/cr-daily-branch b/cr-daily-branch
index 8b7c789..21780b8 100755
--- a/cr-daily-branch
+++ b/cr-daily-branch
@@ -186,6 +186,12 @@ if [ "x$REVISION_OVMF" = x ]; then
fi
fi
if [ "x$REVISION_LIBVIRT" = x ]; then
+ case "$xenbranch" in
+ xen-[0-9]*-testing)
+ BASE_TAG_LIBVIRT=osstest/frozen/$xenbranch
+ export BASE_TAG_LIBVIRT
+ ;;
+ esac
determine_version REVISION_LIBVIRT libvirt LIBVIRT
export REVISION_LIBVIRT
fi
--
2.1.4
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
2016-06-27 15:54 ` Ian Jackson
@ 2016-06-27 16:03 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2016-06-27 16:12 ` Ian Jackson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Daniel P. Berrange @ 2016-06-27 16:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Jackson
Cc: Wei Liu, LibVirt Development List, George Dunlap, Jim Fehlig,
Jan Beulich, Xen-devel
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 04:54:35PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> (Adding Jan Beulich)
>
> Ian Jackson writes ("Re: [libvirt] [Xen-devel] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?"):
> > It seems that the libvirt LIBXL_API_VERSION is now rather higher, at
> > 0x040400, since libvirt#fccf27253ced
> > libxl: switch to using libxl_domain_create_restore from v4.4 API
> >
> > One unfortunate effect of this is to break the osstest tests of the
> > Xen 4.3 stable branch, which for the moment is still allegedly in
> > security support.
> >
> > I can't really see a way that this kind of problem could be avoided
> > in principle, without
> > - providing a more sophisticated way for libxl callers to set the
> > requested version
> > - providing more compatibility code in libvirt, too, and retaining
> > it for some time
> >
> > I think instead that it would probably be better for osstest to
> > "freeze" the version of libvirt that it is using, every time we branch
> > Xen.
> >
> > So Xen 4.4 would be tested with whatever libvirt we were using when
> > the stable branch for Xen 4.4 was made, and so on.
> >
> > Does that sound sensible ?
>
> In the assumption that it is, I have:
>
> Created the following branch refs on xenbits in the toplevel
> libvirt.git:
>
> osstest/frozen/xen-4.3-testing 9a0c7f5f834185db9017c34aabc03ad99cf37bed
> osstest/frozen/xen-4.4-testing 33fb8ff185846a7b4974105d2c9400690a6f95cf
> osstest/frozen/xen-4.5-testing cda1cc170f07b45911b3dad03e42c8ebfc210fa1
> osstest/frozen/xen-4.6-testing eac167e2610d3e59b32f7ec7ba78cbc8c420a425
> osstest/frozen/xen-4.7-testing 1a41ed5af5e1704dd9b0bdca40df5c9cacbdabfc
How did you pick those hashes ? Would it make more sense to pick the
nearest libvirt release tag ? eg v1.3.2 instead of 33fb8ff18584 ?
>
> These were those tested by the following `tolerable' osstest push gate
> flights for the corresponding Xen tree:
>
> xen-4.3-testing 9a0c7f5f8341 86673
> xen-4.4-testing 33fb8ff18584 85031
> xen-4.5-testing cda1cc170f07 83135
> xen-4.6-testing eac167e2610d 96031
> xen-4.7-testing 1a41ed5af5e1 95728
>
> And I have prepared the patch below, which (together with a
> prerequisite, in my tree) will implement this in osstest.
>
> Ian.
>
> From 5d1c91d3c53b580305e96d62f8ca84f85f8d3011 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 16:49:52 +0100
> Subject: [OSSTEST PATCH] cr-daily-branch: libvirt: use frozen version on
> stable branches
>
> libvirt master might increase its LIBXL_API_VERSION. When this feeds
> through osstest it can cause the push gates of Xen stable branches to
> break.
>
> So for stable Xen branches do not track libvirt upstream. Instead,
> use a frozen revision. (Only for main push gate tests of stable Xen
> branches.)
>
> The frozen branch is never going to be updated so it is not suitable
> for other kinds of uses. In particular it won't get security fixes.
> So we call the refs osstest/frozen/xen-K.L-testing to discourage
> users from using them.
>
> Deployment note: The Xen release checklist needs a new item "add this
> frozen libvirt branch".
>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> ---
> cr-daily-branch | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/cr-daily-branch b/cr-daily-branch
> index 8b7c789..21780b8 100755
> --- a/cr-daily-branch
> +++ b/cr-daily-branch
> @@ -186,6 +186,12 @@ if [ "x$REVISION_OVMF" = x ]; then
> fi
> fi
> if [ "x$REVISION_LIBVIRT" = x ]; then
> + case "$xenbranch" in
> + xen-[0-9]*-testing)
> + BASE_TAG_LIBVIRT=osstest/frozen/$xenbranch
> + export BASE_TAG_LIBVIRT
> + ;;
> + esac
> determine_version REVISION_LIBVIRT libvirt LIBVIRT
> export REVISION_LIBVIRT
> fi
Overall I think your approach makes sense.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
2016-06-27 16:03 ` Daniel P. Berrange
@ 2016-06-27 16:12 ` Ian Jackson
2016-06-27 16:17 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2016-06-27 16:35 ` Jim Fehlig
0 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Ian Jackson @ 2016-06-27 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel P. Berrange
Cc: Wei Liu, LibVirt Development List, George Dunlap, Jim Fehlig,
Jan Beulich, Xen-devel
Daniel P. Berrange writes ("Re: [libvirt] [Xen-devel] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?"):
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 04:54:35PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Created the following branch refs on xenbits in the toplevel
> > libvirt.git:
> >
> > osstest/frozen/xen-4.3-testing 9a0c7f5f834185db9017c34aabc03ad99cf37bed
> > osstest/frozen/xen-4.4-testing 33fb8ff185846a7b4974105d2c9400690a6f95cf
> > osstest/frozen/xen-4.5-testing cda1cc170f07b45911b3dad03e42c8ebfc210fa1
> > osstest/frozen/xen-4.6-testing eac167e2610d3e59b32f7ec7ba78cbc8c420a425
> > osstest/frozen/xen-4.7-testing 1a41ed5af5e1704dd9b0bdca40df5c9cacbdabfc
>
> How did you pick those hashes ? Would it make more sense to pick the
> nearest libvirt release tag ? eg v1.3.2 instead of 33fb8ff18584 ?
>
> > These were those tested by the following `tolerable' osstest push gate
> > flights for the corresponding Xen tree:
> >
> > xen-4.3-testing 9a0c7f5f8341 86673
> > xen-4.4-testing 33fb8ff18584 85031
> > xen-4.5-testing cda1cc170f07 83135
> > xen-4.6-testing eac167e2610d 96031
> > xen-4.7-testing 1a41ed5af5e1 95728
I picked them by searching my mail archives for osstest `tolerable'
push gate flights - ie, passes in our CI system.
That minimises the risk that the selected versions are themselves
troublesome for some reason, needing another round of adjustment.
It might indeed be better to convert them to nearby release tags.
However:
mariner:libvirt> git-describe 9a0c7f5f834185db9017c34aabc03ad99cf37bed
v1.3.2-202-g9a0c7f5
mariner:libvirt> git-describe 33fb8ff185846a7b4974105d2c9400690a6f95cf
v1.3.2-rc2-1-g33fb8ff
mariner:libvirt> git-describe cda1cc170f07b45911b3dad03e42c8ebfc210fa1
v1.3.1-262-gcda1cc1
mariner:libvirt> git-describe eac167e2610d3e59b32f7ec7ba78cbc8c420a425
v1.3.5-318-geac167e
mariner:libvirt> git-describe 1a41ed5af5e1704dd9b0bdca40df5c9cacbdabfc
v1.3.5-129-g1a41ed5
mariner:libvirt>
So in most cases these hashes are well away from a release tag.
Does libvirt have stable release branches ? One approach would be to
have osstest track a suitable libvirt stable release branche for each
Xen stable release branch.
That would involve setting up a push gate for each of the chosen
libvirt stable branches. That would be worthwhile if we expect those
stable branches to acquire commits which break Xen, and which we could
like to be told about. But I'm not sure that's the case.
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
2016-06-27 16:12 ` Ian Jackson
@ 2016-06-27 16:17 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2016-06-27 16:35 ` Jim Fehlig
1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Daniel P. Berrange @ 2016-06-27 16:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Jackson
Cc: Wei Liu, LibVirt Development List, George Dunlap, Jim Fehlig,
Jan Beulich, Xen-devel
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 05:12:52PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange writes ("Re: [libvirt] [Xen-devel] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?"):
> > On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 04:54:35PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > Created the following branch refs on xenbits in the toplevel
> > > libvirt.git:
> > >
> > > osstest/frozen/xen-4.3-testing 9a0c7f5f834185db9017c34aabc03ad99cf37bed
> > > osstest/frozen/xen-4.4-testing 33fb8ff185846a7b4974105d2c9400690a6f95cf
> > > osstest/frozen/xen-4.5-testing cda1cc170f07b45911b3dad03e42c8ebfc210fa1
> > > osstest/frozen/xen-4.6-testing eac167e2610d3e59b32f7ec7ba78cbc8c420a425
> > > osstest/frozen/xen-4.7-testing 1a41ed5af5e1704dd9b0bdca40df5c9cacbdabfc
> >
> > How did you pick those hashes ? Would it make more sense to pick the
> > nearest libvirt release tag ? eg v1.3.2 instead of 33fb8ff18584 ?
> >
> > > These were those tested by the following `tolerable' osstest push gate
> > > flights for the corresponding Xen tree:
> > >
> > > xen-4.3-testing 9a0c7f5f8341 86673
> > > xen-4.4-testing 33fb8ff18584 85031
> > > xen-4.5-testing cda1cc170f07 83135
> > > xen-4.6-testing eac167e2610d 96031
> > > xen-4.7-testing 1a41ed5af5e1 95728
>
> I picked them by searching my mail archives for osstest `tolerable'
> push gate flights - ie, passes in our CI system.
>
> That minimises the risk that the selected versions are themselves
> troublesome for some reason, needing another round of adjustment.
>
> It might indeed be better to convert them to nearby release tags.
> However:
>
> mariner:libvirt> git-describe 9a0c7f5f834185db9017c34aabc03ad99cf37bed
> v1.3.2-202-g9a0c7f5
> mariner:libvirt> git-describe 33fb8ff185846a7b4974105d2c9400690a6f95cf
> v1.3.2-rc2-1-g33fb8ff
> mariner:libvirt> git-describe cda1cc170f07b45911b3dad03e42c8ebfc210fa1
> v1.3.1-262-gcda1cc1
> mariner:libvirt> git-describe eac167e2610d3e59b32f7ec7ba78cbc8c420a425
> v1.3.5-318-geac167e
> mariner:libvirt> git-describe 1a41ed5af5e1704dd9b0bdca40df5c9cacbdabfc
> v1.3.5-129-g1a41ed5
> mariner:libvirt>
>
> So in most cases these hashes are well away from a release tag.
>
> Does libvirt have stable release branches ? One approach would be to
> have osstest track a suitable libvirt stable release branche for each
> Xen stable release branch.
Yep, there is a vN.N.N-maint branch for every release
NB, with our new numbering that'll be changing nto vN.N-maint instead.
> That would involve setting up a push gate for each of the chosen
> libvirt stable branches. That would be worthwhile if we expect those
> stable branches to acquire commits which break Xen, and which we could
> like to be told about. But I'm not sure that's the case.
Stuff goes onto the stable branches on an as-needed basis - mostly coming
from the distro maintainers response to bug fixes from their users. There's
probably not a whole lot that's touching xen on a regular basis and we're
quite strict in what we accept for stable.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
2016-06-27 16:12 ` Ian Jackson
2016-06-27 16:17 ` Daniel P. Berrange
@ 2016-06-27 16:35 ` Jim Fehlig
2016-06-27 16:54 ` Ian Jackson
1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Jim Fehlig @ 2016-06-27 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Jackson, Daniel P. Berrange
Cc: LibVirt Development List, Xen-devel, Wei Liu, George Dunlap, Jan Beulich
On 06/27/2016 10:12 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange writes ("Re: [libvirt] [Xen-devel] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?"):
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 04:54:35PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> Created the following branch refs on xenbits in the toplevel
>>> libvirt.git:
>>>
>>> osstest/frozen/xen-4.3-testing 9a0c7f5f834185db9017c34aabc03ad99cf37bed
>>> osstest/frozen/xen-4.4-testing 33fb8ff185846a7b4974105d2c9400690a6f95cf
>>> osstest/frozen/xen-4.5-testing cda1cc170f07b45911b3dad03e42c8ebfc210fa1
>>> osstest/frozen/xen-4.6-testing eac167e2610d3e59b32f7ec7ba78cbc8c420a425
>>> osstest/frozen/xen-4.7-testing 1a41ed5af5e1704dd9b0bdca40df5c9cacbdabfc
>> How did you pick those hashes ? Would it make more sense to pick the
>> nearest libvirt release tag ? eg v1.3.2 instead of 33fb8ff18584 ?
>>
>>> These were those tested by the following `tolerable' osstest push gate
>>> flights for the corresponding Xen tree:
>>>
>>> xen-4.3-testing 9a0c7f5f8341 86673
>>> xen-4.4-testing 33fb8ff18584 85031
>>> xen-4.5-testing cda1cc170f07 83135
>>> xen-4.6-testing eac167e2610d 96031
>>> xen-4.7-testing 1a41ed5af5e1 95728
> I picked them by searching my mail archives for osstest `tolerable'
> push gate flights - ie, passes in our CI system.
>
> That minimises the risk that the selected versions are themselves
> troublesome for some reason, needing another round of adjustment.
>
> It might indeed be better to convert them to nearby release tags.
> However:
>
> mariner:libvirt> git-describe 9a0c7f5f834185db9017c34aabc03ad99cf37bed
> v1.3.2-202-g9a0c7f5
> mariner:libvirt> git-describe 33fb8ff185846a7b4974105d2c9400690a6f95cf
> v1.3.2-rc2-1-g33fb8ff
> mariner:libvirt> git-describe cda1cc170f07b45911b3dad03e42c8ebfc210fa1
> v1.3.1-262-gcda1cc1
It seems odd that Xen 4.5 would use an older libvirt release than Xen 4.3.
> mariner:libvirt> git-describe eac167e2610d3e59b32f7ec7ba78cbc8c420a425
> v1.3.5-318-geac167e
> mariner:libvirt> git-describe 1a41ed5af5e1704dd9b0bdca40df5c9cacbdabfc
> v1.3.5-129-g1a41ed5
> mariner:libvirt>
>
> So in most cases these hashes are well away from a release tag.
>
> Does libvirt have stable release branches ? One approach would be to
> have osstest track a suitable libvirt stable release branche for each
> Xen stable release branch.
I see Daniel already answered this question.
>
> That would involve setting up a push gate for each of the chosen
> libvirt stable branches. That would be worthwhile if we expect those
> stable branches to acquire commits which break Xen, and which we could
> like to be told about. But I'm not sure that's the case.
I occasionally backport Xen bug fixes to -maint branches. Cole has also grabbed
some Xen bug fixes when making a stable release of a -maint branch. But such
backports should be trivial and obvious bug fixes that shouldn't cause build or
runtime breakage with Xen.
Regards,
Jim
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
2016-06-27 16:35 ` Jim Fehlig
@ 2016-06-27 16:54 ` Ian Jackson
2016-06-28 7:01 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Ian Jackson @ 2016-06-27 16:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jim Fehlig
Cc: Wei Liu, Daniel P. Berrange, LibVirt Development List,
George Dunlap, Jan Beulich, Xen-devel
Jim Fehlig writes ("Re: [libvirt] [Xen-devel] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?"):
> On 06/27/2016 10:12 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Does libvirt have stable release branches ? One approach would be to
> > have osstest track a suitable libvirt stable release branche for each
> > Xen stable release branch.
>
> I see Daniel already answered this question.
>
> >
> > That would involve setting up a push gate for each of the chosen
> > libvirt stable branches. That would be worthwhile if we expect those
> > stable branches to acquire commits which break Xen, and which we could
> > like to be told about. But I'm not sure that's the case.
>
> I occasionally backport Xen bug fixes to -maint branches. Cole has
> also grabbed some Xen bug fixes when making a stable release of a
> -maint branch. But such backports should be trivial and obvious bug
> fixes that shouldn't cause build or runtime breakage with Xen.
OK. Thanks for the feedback. I'll go ahead with my plan with the
git commit ids named in my earlier email.
Thanks,
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
2016-06-27 16:54 ` Ian Jackson
@ 2016-06-28 7:01 ` Jan Beulich
2016-06-28 10:42 ` Ian Jackson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2016-06-28 7:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Jackson
Cc: Wei Liu, Daniel P. Berrange, LibVirt Development List,
George Dunlap, Jim Fehlig, Xen-devel
>>> On 27.06.16 at 18:54, <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> Jim Fehlig writes ("Re: [libvirt] [Xen-devel] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver
> breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?"):
>> On 06/27/2016 10:12 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> > Does libvirt have stable release branches ? One approach would be to
>> > have osstest track a suitable libvirt stable release branche for each
>> > Xen stable release branch.
>>
>> I see Daniel already answered this question.
>>
>> >
>> > That would involve setting up a push gate for each of the chosen
>> > libvirt stable branches. That would be worthwhile if we expect those
>> > stable branches to acquire commits which break Xen, and which we could
>> > like to be told about. But I'm not sure that's the case.
>>
>> I occasionally backport Xen bug fixes to -maint branches. Cole has
>> also grabbed some Xen bug fixes when making a stable release of a
>> -maint branch. But such backports should be trivial and obvious bug
>> fixes that shouldn't cause build or runtime breakage with Xen.
>
> OK. Thanks for the feedback. I'll go ahead with my plan with the
> git commit ids named in my earlier email.
The only (hopefully highly theoretical) problem I see with this is that
we may end up picking a libvirt commit which subsequently (e.g. via
a libxl backport) turns out to have an issue. Such a problem could be
dealt with in the suggested the stable branch tracking model (or any
other model not dealing with something completely frozen).
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* Re: [libvirt] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?
2016-06-28 7:01 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2016-06-28 10:42 ` Ian Jackson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Ian Jackson @ 2016-06-28 10:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich
Cc: Wei Liu, Daniel P. Berrange, LibVirt Development List,
George Dunlap, Jim Fehlig, Xen-devel
Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [libvirt] [Xen-devel] Fixing libvirt's libxl driver breakage -- where to define LIBXL_API_VERSION?"):
> On 27.06.16 at 18:54, <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > OK. Thanks for the feedback. I'll go ahead with my plan with the
> > git commit ids named in my earlier email.
>
> The only (hopefully highly theoretical) problem I see with this is that
> we may end up picking a libvirt commit which subsequently (e.g. via
> a libxl backport) turns out to have an issue. Such a problem could be
> dealt with in the suggested the stable branch tracking model (or any
> other model not dealing with something completely frozen).
I don't think there is anything stopping us manually updating one of
these frozen "branches", should such a situation occur.
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread