Skip to content
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

Basic actions #77

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 20, 2024
Merged

Basic actions #77

merged 2 commits into from
May 20, 2024

Conversation

marnovandermaas
Copy link
Contributor

These actions should help keep the legacy software and simulator in a buildable state.

You can see both of them passing here: https://github.com/marnovandermaas/sonata-system/actions

@marnovandermaas marnovandermaas requested review from HU90m and nbdd0121 May 16, 2024 11:36
@HU90m
Copy link
Member

HU90m commented May 17, 2024

I was planning to set up a nix based workflow similar to https://github.com/lowRISC/symphony-system/blob/9a502baeecd36002e0d4413bc7d63f9be5676709/.github/workflows/quality.yml

Mainly because:

  • We can ensure the CI checks are super easy to reproduce locally and run before committing a PR.
  • We'll also be using nix cache for the CHERIoT toolchain anyway)
  • We'd like to move to pomona as a hosted runner and moving nix builds is trivial. (Also no rebuild required if it has been build before by CI or a lowRISC engineer has pushed to the cache.)

.github/workflows/cmake.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/workflows/cmake.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/workflows/cmake.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/workflows/cmake.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/workflows/cmake.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/workflows/cmake.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/workflows/cmake.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@marnovandermaas
Copy link
Contributor Author

I was planning to set up a nix based workflow similar to https://github.com/lowRISC/symphony-system/blob/9a502baeecd36002e0d4413bc7d63f9be5676709/.github/workflows/quality.yml

Mainly because:

* We can ensure the CI checks are super easy to reproduce locally and run before committing a PR.

* We'll also be using nix cache for the CHERIoT toolchain anyway)

* We'd like to move to pomona as a hosted runner and moving nix builds is trivial. (Also no rebuild required if it has been build before by CI or a lowRISC engineer has pushed to the cache.)

I'm happy with that flow. I just put this PR together since it was quite easy and we can have some small checks on PRs until you get that set up.

@marnovandermaas marnovandermaas force-pushed the main branch 9 times, most recently from 171e9c3 to 5df08de Compare May 17, 2024 16:05
@marnovandermaas marnovandermaas requested review from nbdd0121 and HU90m May 17, 2024 16:07
.github/workflows/ci.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/workflows/ci.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@marnovandermaas marnovandermaas merged commit c834e70 into lowRISC:main May 20, 2024
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants