Conversation
Signed-off-by: Florian Zaruba <florian@openhwgroup.org>
MikeOpenHWGroup
requested review from
XavierAubert,
pascalgouedo,
silabs-hfegran,
suppamax and
zarubaf
and removed request for
pascalgouedo
MikeOpenHWGroup
added
cv32e40p
Common Infrastructure
| # on: | ||
| # push: | ||
| # branches: | ||
| # - 'dev' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You might want to change that, depending on when to trigger the job. Most l likely on PRs to dev I guess?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, you are correct. I will be discussing the details of this with @rickoco (to understand our legal constraints) and the Members (to understand their expectations) and will update the trigger accordingly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it relates to the process which had been setup for cv32e40p: https://github.com/openhwgroup/cv32e40p#contributing
| # Questasim (vsim) environment | ||
| # - export QUESTAROOT=/onespin/questasim | ||
| # - export LM_LICENSE_FILE=29000@ip-172-31-46-244 | ||
| # - export PATH=${QUESTAROOT}/bin:${PATH} | ||
| # - export MTI_VCO_MODE=64 | ||
| # - wget https://buildbot.embecosm.com/job/corev-gcc-centos7/19/artifact/corev-openhw-gcc-centos7-20230905.tar.gz |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, the commented lines will be removed before the Draft status of this PR is dropped. These were left in place to show you what I did to get Questasim (vsim) to run. It did not work. Perhaps the value of LM_LICENSE_FILE needs to be set to the same value as we are using for SNPSLMD_LICENSE_FILE? Any thoughts on this?
silabs-hfegran
left a comment
silabs-hfegran
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ci_check script changes looks good to me - no immediate concerns there; as for the AWS related files I think that is best left up to others to review.
|
|
||
| build: | ||
| commands: | ||
| - chown -R florian:florian . |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do not fully comprehend everything here, but are these scripts tied to a specific users account? should/could this be generalized?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a good question. The CI runs on a AWS VM instance that only OpenHW staff have access to. It could be any of us, but it cannot be "just anyone". It probably makes sense to create a generic "openhw-ci-runner" account that has its access privileges tuned to the CI requirements (and no more).
4 participants
This is a prototype of a VCS CI running on AWS.
.github/workflows/aws.ymlwas provided by @zarubaf and I have not modified it in any meaningful way. Thebuildspec.ymlfile has been substantially changed and this is where reviewers should spend most of their time.Other changes include updates to
bin/ci_checkto ensure it generates a valid and accurate return code andvcs.mkto minimize the size of the logfile generated.This PR may not survive a review, but I am asking for your review now because there will be core-specific buildspecs in future PRs.