Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 26 Jul 2022 18:17:10 -0300 | From | Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf scripts python: Let script to be python2 compliant |
| |
Em Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 01:43:31PM -0700, Ian Rogers escreveu: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 12:43 PM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo > <acme@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > Em Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 10:52:31AM -0700, Ian Rogers escreveu: > > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 9:57 AM Alan Bartlett <ajb@elrepo.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 25 Jul 2022 at 16:51, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Em Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 06:42:20PM +0800, Leo Yan escreveu: > > > > > > The mainline kernel can be used for relative old distros, e.g. RHEL 7. > > > > > > The distro doesn't upgrade from python2 to python3, this causes the > > > > > > building error that the python script is not python2 compliant. > > > > > > > > > > > > To fix the building failure, this patch changes from the python f-string > > > > > > format to traditional string format. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, applied. > > > > > > > > > > - Arnaldo > > > > > > > > Leo / Arnaldo, > > > > > > > > Applying the patch on top of -5.19-rc8 fixes the problem that we (the > > > > ELRepo Project) experienced when attempting to build on RHEL7. > > > > > > > > So -- > > > > > > > > Tested-by: Alan Bartlett <ajb@elrepo.org> > > > > > > > > Hopefully you will get it to Linus in time for -5.19 GA. > > > > > So I'm somewhat concerned about perf supporting unsupported > > > distributions and this holding the code base back. RHEL7 was launched > > > 8 years ago (June 10, 2014) and full support ended 3 years ago (August > > > 6, 2019) [1]. Currently RHEL7 is in "Maintenance Support or > > > Maintenance Support 2" phase which is defined to mean [2]: > > > > > > ``` > > > During the Maintenance Support Phase for Red Hat Enterprise Linux > > > Version 8 & 9, and Maintenance Support 2 Phase for Red Hat Enterprise > > > Linux version 7, Red Hat defined Critical and Important impact > > > Security Advisories (RHSAs) and selected (at Red Hat discretion) > > > Urgent Priority Bug Fix Advisories (RHBAs) may be released as they > > > become available. Other errata advisories may be delivered as > > > appropriate. > > > > > > New functionality and new hardware enablement are not planned for > > > availability in the Maintenance Support (RHEL 8 & 9) Phase and > > > Maintenance Support 2 (RHEL 7) Phase. > > > ``` > > > > > > >From this definition, why would RHEL7 pick up a new perf tool? I don't > > > think they would and as such we don't need to worry about supporting > > > it. RHEL8 defaults to python 3 and full support ends for it next year. > > > Let's set the bar at RHEL8 and not worry about RHEL7 breakages like > > > this in future. I think the bar for caring should be "will the distro > > > pick up our code", if we don't do this then we're signing up to not > > > allowing tools to update for 10 years! If someone is building a kernel > > > and perf tool on RHEL7 then they should be signing up to also deal > > > with tool chain issues, which in this case can mean installing > > > python3. > > > > In this specific supporting things that people report using, like was > > done in this case, isn't such a big problem. > > So there are linters will fire for this code and say it is not > pythonic. It is only a linter warning vs asking to support an 8 year > old out of support distribution. There are other cases, such as > improving the C code structure, where we've failed to land changes > because of build errors on old distributions. This could indicate perf > code is wrong or the distribution is wrong. I'm saying that if we > believe in the perf code being correct and the distribution is out of > support, then we should keep the perf code as-is and the issue is one > for user of the out-of-support distribution. > > > Someone reported a problem in a system they used, the author of the code > > in question posted a patch allowing perf to be used in such old systems, > > doesn't get in the way of newer systems, small patch, merged, life goes > > on. > > Right, but we're setting a precedent for supporting out of support > distributions. If we can say "life goes on" can we land this *current* > Debian fix? > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220629034007.332804-1-irogers@google.com/
I'll revisit the discussion with PeterZ...
- Arnaldo
> > Sometimes some organizations are stuck with some distro till they can go > > thru re-certifications, bidding for new hardware, whatever, and then > > they want to continue using the latest perf on those systems because > > they want to benefit from new features we're working on that work on > > such systems. If the cost is small, like in this case, I see no problems > > to have perf working on such older systems. > > So there's no problem with perf working on old systems. The issue is > supporting 10 year old unsupported build infrastructure. The fact that > the build infrastructure is unsupported means we need to carry all the > fixes in the tools tree and that can mean doing some questionably sane > things, like supporting python 2 (end of life for 2.5 years) on RHEL7 > (end of full support 3 years ago). RHEL8 still has a year of support, > so great test that. RHEL7 then fix your tools and perf will work for > you - where fix means "rpm -i python3", hardly a huge chore. > > Thanks, > Ian
--
- Arnaldo
| |