emacs-bug-tracker
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#73288: closed (Request for merging "mesa-updates" branch)


From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: bug#73288: closed (Request for merging "mesa-updates" branch)
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2024 18:50:02 +0000

Your message dated Tue, 05 Nov 2024 18:49:07 +0000
with message-id <87msida543.fsf@protonmail.com>
and subject line Re: [bug#73288] Request for merging "mesa-updates" branch
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #73288,
regarding Request for merging "mesa-updates" branch
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
73288: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=73288
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Request for merging "mesa-updates" branch Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 02:38:16 +0000
Hello Guix,

The mesa-updates branch I think is just almost ready for merging. Besides some 
other fixes and updates, the main series is tracked at 
<https://issues.guix.gnu.org/73071>. There is an update to add NVK support to 
mesa for x86_64-linux which I need to review and push (and rebase to get more 
fixes from master).

Coverage looks good for x86_64 and i686 on QA, with powerpc64le as well on 
Berlin. I worry that aarch64 and others may have stalled out on Bordeaux. 
Perhaps Efraim can chime in there.

With an update for NVK for x86_64, that will take maybe a day to catch up again 
in builds but tends to be pretty quick. I'm not aware of other blockers.

Thanks!
John




--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: [bug#73288] Request for merging "mesa-updates" branch Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2024 18:49:07 +0000
On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 11:15 PM, John Kehayias wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 12:50 AM, Z572 wrote:
>
>> John Kehayias via Guix-patches via <guix-patches@gnu.org> writes:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 03, 2024 at 03:02 PM, Efraim Flashner wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, Nov 03, 2024 at 06:04:08PM +0800, Z572 wrote:
>>>>> John Kehayias via Guix-patches via <guix-patches@gnu.org> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Hello Guix,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > The mesa-updates branch I think is just almost ready for
>>>>> > merging. Besides some other fixes and updates, the main series is
>>>>> > tracked at <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/73071>. There is an update to
>>>>> > add NVK support to mesa for x86_64-linux which I need to review and
>>>>> > push (and rebase to get more fixes from master).
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Coverage looks good for x86_64 and i686 on QA, with powerpc64le as
>>>>> > well on Berlin. I worry that aarch64 and others may have stalled out
>>>>> > on Bordeaux. Perhaps Efraim can chime in there.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > With an update for NVK for x86_64, that will take maybe a day to catch
>>>>> > up again in builds but tends to be pretty quick. I'm not aware of
>>>>> > other blockers.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Thanks!
>>>>> > John
>>>>>
>>>>> maybe is time to merge?
>>>>>
>>>>> see <https://qa.guix.gnu.org/branch/mesa-updates>
>>>>> ci       have x86_64-linux 96.3%, i686-linux 87.7%, powerpc64le-linux 
>>>>> 85.5%
>>>>> bordeaux have x86_64-linux 91.5%, i686-linux 77.8%, armhf-linux
>>>>> 79.4%, aarch64-linux 89.0%.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there anything else in the way?
>>>>
>>>> Comparing them against master and against each other:
>>>> x86_64: comparable on ci, slight regression on bordeaux
>>>> i686:   comparable on ci, regression on bordeaux (91.8 -> 77.8)
>>>> aarch64: comparable on ci, regression on bordeaux (97.0 -> 89.0)
>>>> armhf:  slight regression on bordeaux
>>>> ppc64le: comparable on ci and bordeaux
>>>> riscv64: regression on bordeaux (62.0 -> 28.2)
>>>>
>>>> I feel like bordeaux will catch-up fairly quickly post merge.  However,
>>>> we do now have the regression page for bordeaux of master vs
>>>> mesa-updates:
>>>> <https://qa.guix.gnu.org/branch/mesa-updates/package-changes?x86_64-linux-change=blocked&x86_64-linux-change=still-blocked&x86_64-linux-change=unknown-to-blocked&x86_64-linux-change=new-blocked>
>>>>
>>>> However, after spot-checking a few of them to see if there are
>>>> substitutes (including gnome and openjdk) it looks like it probably just
>>>> needs to be sent through again.
>>>>
>>>> It looks okay to me
>>>
>>> I had been keeping a close eye some weeks ago during the initial batch
>>> of patches I pushed and I also think everything looks good. I was just
>>> waiting for non-x86 substitute coverage which seems to finally be
>>> there as noted above after waiting for other branches and recent
>>> Berlin issues. I have been running my system on this branch for a
>>> couple weeks as well.
>>>
>>> However, the other day on IRC there was a comment about (if I
>>> remember) Sway hardware acceleration needing newer libva...? I think
>>> it was Josselin (cc'ed); apologies if I misremembered as I was
>>> traveling.
>>>
>>> Is that a blocker? If so, it would be good to have that update (plus
>>> likely yet another mesa version bump) so substitutes can be
>>> rebuilt. But I also don't want to hold up any other branches longer
>>> than necessary as this has already been waiting for some weeks.
>>
>> i think we can merge this branch first, and setup a new branch to fix/update
>> libva and mesa, people can use inferior to get have hardware
>> acceleration package on new branch. WDYT?
>>
>
> Yes, sounds good. I did a rebase and deleted/pushed to mesa-updates.
> I'll check in about 12 hours and will do the merge assuming it still
> looks good and no sudden issues.
>
> Ah, did find the log I missed about Sway, seems it will be for the new
> version <https://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2024-10-31.log#120948>. So, I
> will do the merge and then we can do a new branch for libva, sway,
> etc. (and keep up with mesa). Probably will just put it in the queue
> once build slots open up as I would like to (every time) keep it small
> and quick to keep it from becoming harder to manage.
>
> Thanks all!
> John

Merged! Closing. Thanks all.



--- End Message ---

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]