CI to stop testing meta-* layers not in tested machine

[Andrew Geissler]

I'd like to revisit this topic. It looks like the meta-* layers I
would remove from
meta-CI are still the same as below. We've added the
meta-facebook/meta-tiogapass
since my last email to CI so that will be a meta layer (meta-facebook)
we continue
to test.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Thanks,
Andrew

On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 8:38 AM Andrew Geissler <geissonator at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I took an action item from last weeks Infrastructure Workgroup.
>
> The point was we're wasting CI resources by testing meta-*
> commits that are not actually tested by any of the machines in the
> CI job. We're also falsely marking those commits as Verified because
> if they are not in any of the systems under test, they're not being
> tested at all.
>
> The systems currently run as a part of the meta-* CI jobs are here:
> https://openpower.xyz/view/CI/job/run-meta-ci/
>
> Some quick grepping indicates the following meta-* repos are not
> being tested:
>
> meta-arm
> meta-evb
> meta-google
> meta-hxt
> meta-inspur
> meta-intel
> meta-inventec
> meta-mellanox
> meta-nuvoton
> meta-portwell
> meta-qualcomm
> meta-quanta
> meta-raspberrypi
> meta-security
> meta-x86
> meta-xilinx
>
> This would mean the maintainers of the above repos would need to +1
> Verify the changes to these layers before merging.
>
> Are there any advantages to running CI against meta-* layers that
> are not in a machine being built? Are there other machines we can
> add to CI that would cover some of the meta layers above? The
> general criteria for getting a machine added to CI is that it's actively
> being developed and supported. We also need to balance our
> CI compute resources so the overall goal (in my mind) would be
> to pick the machines that cover the most meta layers.
>
> Andrew