Hi,
There is an idea of device type 'alias' in LAVA. I don't quite understand what the use case for the current implementation was [1]. I tried using it but it wasn't very useful. My use case is that I need to submit jobs to a device type with different device type name. This is used to align device type naming between different labs in a bigger project (kernelci.org in this case). So the questions I have about current implementation: - is there anyone using current implementation? - if current implementation is used, how much trouble would it cause to change the behaviour?
Change in behaviour is quite intrusive and will require database migration.
[1] https://master.lavasoftware.org/static/docs/v2/glossary.html#term-alias
Regards, milosz
Milosz Wasilewski milosz.wasilewski@linaro.org writes:
There is an idea of device type 'alias' in LAVA. I don't quite understand what the use case for the current implementation was [1]. I tried using it but it wasn't very useful. My use case is that I need to submit jobs to a device type with different device type name. This is used to align device type naming between different labs in a bigger project (kernelci.org in this case). So the questions I have about current implementation:
- is there anyone using current implementation?
- if current implementation is used, how much trouble would it cause
to change the behaviour?
No kernelCI labs are using it (at least for kernelCI related jobs.)
I looked into it for the same reasons you are, and found the current implementation neither intuitive or useful.
Kevin
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 03:55:22PM +0000, Milosz Wasilewski wrote:
Hi,
There is an idea of device type 'alias' in LAVA. I don't quite understand what the use case for the current implementation was [1]. I tried using it but it wasn't very useful. My use case is that I need to submit jobs to a device type with different device type name. This is used to align device type naming between different labs in a bigger project (kernelci.org in this case). So the questions I have about current implementation:
- is there anyone using current implementation?
- if current implementation is used, how much trouble would it cause
to change the behaviour?
Change in behaviour is quite intrusive and will require database migration.
[1] https://master.lavasoftware.org/static/docs/v2/glossary.html#term-alias
+1 for this feature to be re-implemented. I have boards I cannot add to kernelci until this feature is available.
I looked in the lava issue tracker - is there any ticket representing this work anywhere?
Thanks, Dan
Regards, milosz
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 at 20:43, Dan Rue dan.rue@linaro.org wrote:
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 03:55:22PM +0000, Milosz Wasilewski wrote:
Hi,
There is an idea of device type 'alias' in LAVA. I don't quite understand what the use case for the current implementation was [1]. I tried using it but it wasn't very useful. My use case is that I need to submit jobs to a device type with different device type name. This is used to align device type naming between different labs in a bigger project (kernelci.org in this case). So the questions I have about current implementation:
- is there anyone using current implementation?
- if current implementation is used, how much trouble would it cause
to change the behaviour?
Change in behaviour is quite intrusive and will require database migration.
[1] https://master.lavasoftware.org/static/docs/v2/glossary.html#term-alias
+1 for this feature to be re-implemented. I have boards I cannot add to kernelci until this feature is available.
I looked in the lava issue tracker - is there any ticket representing this work anywhere?
I don't think I created a ticket. There is a PR though: https://git.lavasoftware.org/lava/lava/merge_requests/495 It's almost ready IMHO. I didn't update the docs yet but all other bits should work fine. If someone could pull it and test it it would be much appreciated.
milosz
Thanks, Dan
Regards, milosz
On 27 Apr 2019, at 10:31, Milosz Wasilewski milosz.wasilewski@linaro.org wrote:
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 at 20:43, Dan Rue <dan.rue@linaro.org mailto:dan.rue@linaro.org> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 03:55:22PM +0000, Milosz Wasilewski wrote:
Hi,
There is an idea of device type 'alias' in LAVA. I don't quite understand what the use case for the current implementation was [1]. I tried using it but it wasn't very useful. My use case is that I need to submit jobs to a device type with different device type name. This is used to align device type naming between different labs in a bigger project (kernelci.org in this case). So the questions I have about current implementation:
- is there anyone using current implementation?
To my knowledge, nobody is using it. As it is implemented it’s not very useful.
- if current implementation is used, how much trouble would it cause
to change the behaviour?
Change in behaviour is quite intrusive and will require database migration.
[1] https://master.lavasoftware.org/static/docs/v2/glossary.html#term-alias
+1 for this feature to be re-implemented. I have boards I cannot add to kernelci until this feature is available.
+1 from me. Solves a lot of the submission issues we’ve seen in the past. Having to create new device types based on how you want to use it.
Dave
I looked in the lava issue tracker - is there any ticket representing this work anywhere?
I don't think I created a ticket. There is a PR though: https://git.lavasoftware.org/lava/lava/merge_requests/495 https://git.lavasoftware.org/lava/lava/merge_requests/495 It's almost ready IMHO. I didn't update the docs yet but all other bits should work fine. If someone could pull it and test it it would be much appreciated.
milosz
Thanks, Dan
Regards, milosz
Lava-devel mailing list Lava-devel@lists.lavasoftware.org mailto:Lava-devel@lists.lavasoftware.org https://lists.lavasoftware.org/mailman/listinfo/lava-devel https://lists.lavasoftware.org/mailman/listinfo/lava-devel
lava-devel@lists.lavasoftware.org
-
Dan Rue -
Dave Pigott -
Kevin Hilman -
Milosz Wasilewski