linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] kci-gitlab: Introducing GitLab-CI Pipeline for Kernel Testing

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <D79RU9MHGKJ8.1HG89ZJS4Q5FC@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 23:30:40 +0200
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: "Vignesh Raman" <vignesh.raman@...labora.com>,
 <kernelci@...ts.linux.dev>
Cc: <linuxtv-ci@...uxtv.org>, <dave.pigott@...labora.com>,
 <mripard@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
 <gustavo.padovan@...labora.com>, <pawiecz@...labora.com>,
 <spbnick@...il.com>, <tales.aparecida@...il.com>,
 <workflows@...r.kernel.org>, <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
 <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>, <nfraprado@...labora.com>,
 <davidgow@...gle.com>, <cocci@...ia.fr>, <Julia.Lawall@...ia.fr>,
 <laura.nao@...labora.com>, <kernel@...labora.com>,
 <torvalds@...uxfoundation.org>, <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
 <daniels@...labora.com>, <helen.koike@...labora.com>,
 <shreeya.patel@...labora.com>, <denys.f@...labora.com>,
 <nicolas.dufresne@...labora.com>, <louis.chauvet@...tlin.com>,
 <hamohammed.sa@...il.com>, <melissa.srw@...il.com>, <simona@...ll.ch>,
 <airlied@...il.com>, <Tim.Bird@...y.com>,
 <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, <broonie@...nel.org>,
 <leobras.c@...il.com>, <groeck@...gle.com>, <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
 <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, <michel.daenzer@...lbox.org>, <sakari.ailus@....fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] kci-gitlab: Introducing GitLab-CI Pipeline for
 Kernel Testing

On Thu Jan 23, 2025 at 3:53 PM EET, Vignesh Raman wrote:
> We are working towards creating a generic, upstream GitLab-CI pipeline
> (kci-gitlab) that will replace DRM-CI [1]. The proposed GitLab-CI pipeline
> is designed with a distributed infrastructure model, making it possible
> to run on any gitLab instance. We plan to leverage KernelCI [2] as the
> backend, utilizing its hardware, rootfs, test plans, and KCIDB [3]
> integration.

Why can't you keep the next version of your great pipeline outside the
kernel tree?

If there is a legit motivation for doing that, why it needs to be bound
to Gitlab? Why can't you make script callable from any CI?

BR, Jarkko