[3/5] toolchain-configs.csv: re-organize for test-pkg

This commit reorganizes the toolchain-configs.csv so that the first
toolchains are a subset of "useful" toolchains to be tested by
contributors to validate a package. This subset is the one that will
be used by default by test-pkg.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
---
 .../autobuild/toolchain-configs.csv                | 30 +++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Thomas, All,

On 2017-10-29 18:14 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> This commit reorganizes the toolchain-configs.csv so that the first
> toolchains are a subset of "useful" toolchains to be tested by
> contributors to validate a package. This subset is the one that will
> be used by default by test-pkg.

I would have done something else:

    N:path:arch

where:
  - N is an integer that is the importance of the toolchain, in the
    range [0..9], with 0 the most important and 9 the least important.

 - path and arch as they are today.

So we'd tag the toolchains between 0 and 9, and default to test those <3
for example.

Which allows us to keep the ordering of the toolchain, which is nice.

But I'm also OK with your solution, just suggesting an alternative.

> Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
> ---
>  .../autobuild/toolchain-configs.csv                | 30 +++++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/support/config-fragments/autobuild/toolchain-configs.csv b/support/config-fragments/autobuild/toolchain-configs.csv
> index efb78eec4f..53d1d7234a 100644
> --- a/support/config-fragments/autobuild/toolchain-configs.csv
> +++ b/support/config-fragments/autobuild/toolchain-configs.csv
> @@ -1,18 +1,37 @@
> +# This file is sorted by "importance" of toolchains, so that by
> +# default test-pkg tests a useful subset of toolchains

    # Toolchains used by default:

> +# Test a regular uClibc toolchain
> +support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-full.config,x86_64
> +
> +# Test a toolchain with glibc and a very recent gcc version
> +support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-cortex-a9-glibc.config,x86_64
> +
> +# Test a noMMU toolchain with no dynamic library support
> +support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-cortex-m4-full.config,x86_64
> +
> +# Test a musl toolchain
> +support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-x86-64-musl.config,x86_64
> +
> +# Test a noMMU toolchain with dynamic library support
> +support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-bfin-full.config,x86_64
> +
> +# Test a MMU toolchain without dynamic library support
> +support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-full-static.config,x86_64
> +
> +# Test a toolchain with an old gcc version (gcc 4.8)
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/armv5-ctng-linux-gnueabi.config,x86
> +
> +# All other toolchains

    # All other toolchains, not used by default:

Do we want to reorder the remaining list by relevance, too, so that a
-n12 would pick the 12 most relevant toolchains?

Or are we just happy that the 7 first are ordered, and we don't care
about the rest?

I'm fine in either case.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/armv7-ctng-linux-gnueabihf.config,x86
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-aarch64-glibc.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arc-full-internal.config,any
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arc-internal-glibc.config,any
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arcle-hs38.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-basic.config,x86_64
> -support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-cortex-a9-glibc.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-cortex-a9-musl.config,x86_64
> -support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-cortex-m4-full.config,x86_64
> -support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-full.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-full-nothread.config,x86_64
> -support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-full-static.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-arm-internal-full.config,any
> -support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-bfin-full.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-i386-pentium4-full.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-i386-pentium-mmx-musl.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-m68k-5208-full.config,x86_64
> @@ -34,7 +53,6 @@ support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-sh4-full.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-sparc-uclibc.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-sparc64-glibc.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-x86-64-core2-full.config,x86_64
> -support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-x86-64-musl.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-xtensa-full.config,x86_64
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/br-xtensa-full-internal.config,any
>  support/config-fragments/autobuild/i686-ctng-linux-gnu.config,x86
> -- 
> 2.13.6
>

Hello,

Thanks for the review, finally getting back to this old patch series!

On Sun, 29 Oct 2017 18:35:36 +0100, Yann E. MORIN wrote:

> I would have done something else:
> 
>     N:path:arch
> 
> where:
>   - N is an integer that is the importance of the toolchain, in the
>     range [0..9], with 0 the most important and 9 the least important.
> 
>  - path and arch as they are today.
> 
> So we'd tag the toolchains between 0 and 9, and default to test those <3
> for example.
> 
> Which allows us to keep the ordering of the toolchain, which is nice.
> 
> But I'm also OK with your solution, just suggesting an alternative.

I don't find adding another field really necessary. After all, all we
need is to distinguish the "important" ones from the "other" ones.

>     # Toolchains used by default:

Fixed.

> > +# All other toolchains  
> 
>     # All other toolchains, not used by default:

Fixed.

> Do we want to reorder the remaining list by relevance, too, so that a
> -n12 would pick the 12 most relevant toolchains?
> 
> Or are we just happy that the 7 first are ordered, and we don't care
> about the rest?

I think it will be difficult to define a "relevance order", nobody will
agree on what is the correct order for all those toolchains, and it is
not super important either. I'm not even sure my "-n" argument to
test-pkg makes a lot of sense. Really the "default" or "all" case are
what I really wanted to add.

Best regards,

Thomas