[yocto-ab] YP HW test strategy

[Philip Balister]

On 01/06/2014 02:34 PM, William Mills wrote:
> On 01/02/2014 09:30 AM, Philip Balister wrote:
>> On 12/11/2013 11:37 AM, William Mills wrote:
>>> On 12/11/2013 08:45 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 08:15 -0500, William Mills wrote:
>>>>> Last meeting I was discussing YP testing on HW and suggesting we
>>>>> adopt LAVA.
>>>>> Since that time:
>>>>> * I have found out that Minnow board was already being worked on for
>>>>> inclusion in LAVA
>>>>> * I formally requested for Linaro to complete the Minnow board LAVA
>>>>> integration happen
>>>>> * Linaro has announced that the LMP board IP have been donated to the
>>>>> open compute project
>>>>>        OCP plans to manufacture boards and give them away
>>>>>        The IP can be obtained from OCP under an open HW license and
>>>>> OCP
>>>>> will be accepting/expecting patches
>>>>>        [LMP are the little boards that help test a device under
>>>>> test, SD
>>>>> card mux, USB mux, HDMI mux etc]
>>>>> [Both Beagleboard and Beaglebone black are already supported in LAVA]
>>>>> * Khem Raj met with the LAVA team at ARM tech con and was impressed
>>>>>        * Khem said he was interested in adopting LAVA for his own work
>>>>>        * Khem said he was going to suggest adopting LAVA at the OE
>>>>> level
>>>>>
>>>>> I will be on the call today if we wish to discuss or we can continue
>>>>> here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard,
>>>>> I am happy to make introductions between the LAVA team and YP if they
>>>>> have not already introduced themselves.
>>>>> Who should be on the list for that?
>>>>
>>>> I'm assuming you saw the email from Paul Eggleton where he evaluated
>>>> the
>>>> current position with LAVA and some of the other technologies out
>>>> there?
>>>> LAVA has some attractive features but also some downsides. I believe
>>>> some of the LAVA people did see and respond to that email.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I did not but have looked at it now.  It looks like Paul is struggling
>>> with the same thing we struggle with: what can LAVA be made to do with a
>>> little bit of tweaking vs what is documented as the canonical (pun
>>> intended) flow.
>>>
>>> I suggest a conf call to work through some of this.
>>
>> Who is going to take the lead getting this moving?
> 
> I'll start organizing this now that most people are back from holidays.
> 
>> What would be really
>> helpful from my point of view is some form of blog/doc showing how to
>> get LAVA to do something useful by testing on OE image in some form of
>> vm. This way we can get a feel for what LAVA can do, without having to
>> setup a master image on some real hardware.
>>
> 
> That sounds like a good milestone but I am not convinced it is the
> first one.  It may be closer to the "done" milestone for the first
> phase of this.

My impression is that LAVA needs better getting started documentation.
>From what Tyler showed Khem and I, LAVA is a very capable test framework.

So the action may be documenting and testing integration with the YP
processes.

Philip

> 
> The first thing I want to do is get a set of 1st level goals assembled
> from the various players.
> 
> I have the people in mind from the TI and Linaro side.  Whom do we need
> from the YP and OE side?  Sounds like Paul is a must have.  Khem and
> Philip have expressed interest, do you want to be in the tiger team or
> review the output?
> 
> 
>