Re: [PATCH] gitlab-ci: Remove unused container images

[Philippe Mathieu-Daudé]

On 2/19/21 2:10 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 19/02/2021 13.00, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> On 2/19/21 12:09 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> We're building a lot of containers in the gitlab-CI that we never use.
>>> This takes away network bandwidth and CPU time from other jobs for no
>>> use, so let's remove them for now. The individual containers could be
>>> re-added later when we really need them.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>>   .gitlab-ci.d/containers.yml | 92 -------------------------------------
>>>   1 file changed, 92 deletions(-)
>>
>> I'm not enthusiast with this patch because I use various in this list
>> from time to time for testing or cross build/disas binaries.
> 
> When I look at our current huge list of containers, I wonder how do we
> know which containers still get used (in the sense of not only build),
> and which ones are likely already bit-rotten? And why do we need that
> many containers? Why both, debian-arm64-test-cross.docker and
> debian-arm64-cross.docker and not combine them? And why do we need that
> many individual cross-compiler docker files if we already have
> debian-all-test-cross.docker that can be used to test most of them? ...
> for me, as a docker ignorant, this is all very opaque and some clean up
> IMHO could really help here.

debian-arm64-cross.docker is to cross-build QEMU, while
debian-arm64-test-cross.docker to cross-build the TCG tests.

debian-arm64-test-cross.docker could probably now be replaced
by debian-all-test-cross.docker.

IIRC the problem we had was on aarch64 hosts many cross-build
packages were broken, so we had to restrict them to the bare
minimal to be able to cross-build the TCG tests there.

>> Not having
>> these containers used mainstream probably show the failure of the
>> project to add good testing coverage on these targets. Most of them are
>> for hobbyist with little time. Removing them will make it even harder
>> to add tests.
> 
> Do you really use the docker files from the gitlab registry? I'd rather
> expected that people build those locally in case they need them...?

TBH I pull from registry 99% of the time. I only build locally if I the
mainstream image is missing something, and I want to add what is missing
in a patch. But even there once finished I pull from my namespace
registry and test with that image, as this is what other will use too.
I want to use the same images from our registry, not my local ones.

>> Can't we keep them disabled? Or put them in manual mode?
> 
> Well, I guess manual mode is fine, too, as long as they don't waste CPU
> cycles and network bandwidth anymore for most people who don't need them.
> 
>  Thomas
> 
>