From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: 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>,
"Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@redhat.com>,
"Artyom Tarasenko" <atar4qemu@gmail.com>,
"Thomas Huth" <thuth@redhat.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 09:28:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87k0mvy4b6.fsf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0a19af15-2f34-4934-c6c9-113e49f5f1f2@redhat.com>
On Mon, Jun 14 2021, John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> wrote:
(...)
> # OS
>
> Currently "os: XXX" for BSD, Linux, Windows, and macOS.
>
> https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/labels?subscribed=&search=os%3A
>
> Multiple OS labels can be applied to an issue.
>
> Originally, we kept this label somewhat vague and have been using it to
> identify both the host AND guest involved with an issue.
>
> Stefan Weil has requested that we refactor this to separate the concerns
> so that he can identify issues where Windows is the host without wading
> through numerous reports where Windows is merely the guest. Reasonable
> request.
>
> Shall we split it into "host: XXX" and "guest: XXX" for {BSD, Linux,
> Windows, macOS}?
Yes to splitting and using something like "hostOS:" and "guestOS:", as
had already been suggested downthread.
For the guest OS, I think we also want "Other". It can be valuable to
know that the guest OS might be doing something that is not done by the
OSes usually run as a guest, so I think this is useful information.
What about linux-user? We probably can't categorize what is being run
very neatly.
>
> This isn't too hard to do at initial triage time, but we'll need to sift
> through the bugs we've labeled so far and re-label them. Help on this
> would be appreciated. I would prefer we create a *new* set of labels and
> then draw down on the old labels instead of just renaming them. That
> way, the old label can be used as a re-triage queue.
>
>
> # arch/target
>
> Currently "target: XXX" for alpha, arm, avr, cris, hexagon, hppa, i386,
> m68k, microblaze, mips, nios2, openrisc, ppc, riscv, rx, s390x, sh4,
> sparc, tricore, xtensa.
>
> https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/labels?subscribed=&search=target%3A
>
> The names map 1:1 to the directories in target/.
> The names in [square brackets] in the label descriptions correspond 1:1
> with the SysEmuTarget QAPI enum defined in qapi/machine.json.
>
> Multiple target labels can be applied to an issue. Originally, this was
> named "arch", so this was to allow multiple architectures to be
> specified to cover the host/guest environment. If we disentangle this,
> we may still want to allow multiple labels to cover bugs that might
> affect multiple targets, though that case might be rare.
>
> Recently, we renamed this from "arch: XXX" to "target: XXX", though the
> label had been being used for both the host and guest architecture, so
> this will need to be re-audited to remove cases where the label had been
> applied for the host architecture.
>
> 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 good; maybe add a catch-all "host-arch: other" to catch
uncommon host architectures?
>
> What I would like to avoid is creating labels like "host: windows-i386"
> where the cross matrix of ({host,guest} X OS x ARCH) starts to require
> ever-increasing specificity of initial triage labels and may increase
> the risk of overly-specified bugs going unnoticed. Maybe my concern is
> unfounded, but I think the over-specificity will hurt more than help at
> this stage.
I think having "host-arch:" and "hostOS:" is enough.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-15 7:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-14 17:32 [RFC] GitLab issue tracker labeling process: arch/target, os, and accel labels John Snow
2021-06-14 17:42 ` Stefan Weil
2021-06-14 18:53 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-06-14 20:25 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-06-15 2:08 ` David Gibson
2021-06-15 13:56 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-06-16 4:38 ` David Gibson
2021-06-15 19:27 ` John Snow
2021-06-15 20:09 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-06-15 7:28 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2021-06-15 14:01 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-06-15 8:56 ` Thomas Huth
2021-06-15 14:03 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87k0mvy4b6.fsf@redhat.com \
--to=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
--cc=alistair.francis@wdc.com \
--cc=atar4qemu@gmail.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=bin.meng@windriver.com \
--cc=crwulff@gmail.com \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=edgar.iglesias@gmail.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=groug@kaod.org \
--cc=jcmvbkbc@gmail.com \
--cc=jsnow@redhat.com \
--cc=kamil@netbsd.org \
--cc=kbastian@mail.uni-paderborn.de \
--cc=laurent@vivier.eu \
--cc=marex@denx.de \
--cc=mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk \
--cc=mrolnik@gmail.com \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=philmd@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=reinoud@netbsd.org \
--cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
--cc=shorne@gmail.com \
--cc=sw@weilnetz.de \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
--cc=tsimpson@quicinc.com \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).