-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 792
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[rom_ext_e2e] Update CI to run ROM_EXT tests on hyper310 #24430
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
@@ -120,7 +120,9 @@ def _parameter_name(env, pname): | |||
def _hacky_tags(env): | ||||
(_, suffix) = env.split(":") | ||||
tags = [] | ||||
if suffix.startswith("fpga_cw310_") or suffix.startswith("fpga_cw340_"): | ||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It is possible that master and es have diverged at this point but in master we have a slightly better way of doing hacky_tags (still hacky): opentitan/rules/opentitan/defs.bzl Line 142 in cf32d0f
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. They have diverged and from a first look, the function on master looks better. I don't think I want to dive down the rabbithole of resolving this divergence. |
||||
if (suffix.startswith("fpga_cw310_") or | ||||
suffix.startswith("fpga_cw340_") or | ||||
suffix.startswith("fpga_hyper310")): | ||||
# We have tags like "cw310_rom_with_real_keys" or "cw310_test_rom" | ||||
# applied to our tests. Since there is no way to adjust tags in a | ||||
# rule's implementation, we have to infer these tag names from the | ||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oops, it's missing the artifacts from (and dependency on) the chip_earlgrey_cw310_hyperdebug job. :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am not a 100% sure I believe we have tests that are defined for fpga_cw310_rom_ext and not fpga_hyper310_rom_ext_tests (like the cryptotests). With this changes, those tests will not run anymore, but maybe they don't need to run on earlgrey_es?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There are some tests defined that use
fpga_cw310_rom_ext
. They're located in//sw/device/silicon_owner/bare_metal
and//sw/device/tests/crypto
. However, in therun-fpga-tests
script, it appears that anfpga_tags
argument (arg 2) offpga_{whatevs}_rom_ext_tests
sets the pattern to//sw/device/silicon_creator/rom_ext/e2e/...
, so this pipeline stage was never running those other tests in the first place.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
AFAICT, the following tests are not currently being run in CI:
The change in this PR does not affect whether or not these tests run.
It would be nice to run them on
earlgrey_es_sival
. We should make sure they run onmaster
:There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If you want to run these jobs on the earlgrey_es_sival branch, I think a new FPGA job will be needed. I will double-check that they run on master (or at least will run once the CI orchestrator is merged)