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

add support for ppc64le architecture #5459

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Dec 19, 2022

Conversation

seth-priya
Copy link
Contributor

Signed-off-by: Priya Seth [email protected]

Description

add support for ppc64le architecture

Issues Resolved

#1303

Check List

  • New functionality includes testing.
    • All tests pass
  • New functionality has been documented.
    • New functionality has javadoc added
  • Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff
  • Commit changes are listed out in CHANGELOG.md file (See: Changelog)

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

@seth-priya seth-priya requested review from a team and reta as code owners December 6, 2022 12:18
@seth-priya
Copy link
Contributor Author

The changes are based on #4001

The basic build (localDisto), precommit check pass, gradle-check on ppc64le fails with same issue as reported at #4173

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 6, 2022

Gradle Check (Jenkins) Run Completed with:

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Dec 6, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #5459 (0c153bc) into main (cb26035) will increase coverage by 0.07%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #5459      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     70.95%   71.02%   +0.07%     
- Complexity    58304    58340      +36     
============================================
  Files          4733     4733              
  Lines        278256   278262       +6     
  Branches      40249    40249              
============================================
+ Hits         197441   197649     +208     
+ Misses        64628    64433     -195     
+ Partials      16187    16180       -7     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
.../main/java/org/opensearch/gradle/Architecture.java 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
.../opensearch/gradle/DistributionDownloadPlugin.java 87.50% <100.00%> (+0.26%) ⬆️
...ldSrc/src/main/java/org/opensearch/gradle/Jdk.java 58.44% <100.00%> (+0.54%) ⬆️
...ava/org/opensearch/bootstrap/SystemCallFilter.java 35.52% <100.00%> (+0.28%) ⬆️
...a/org/opensearch/tasks/TaskCancelledException.java 50.00% <0.00%> (-50.00%) ⬇️
.../admin/cluster/reroute/ClusterRerouteResponse.java 60.00% <0.00%> (-40.00%) ⬇️
...luster/routing/allocation/RoutingExplanations.java 62.06% <0.00%> (-37.94%) ⬇️
...java/org/opensearch/threadpool/ThreadPoolInfo.java 56.25% <0.00%> (-37.50%) ⬇️
...ensearch/client/indices/DetailAnalyzeResponse.java 20.54% <0.00%> (-34.25%) ⬇️
...cluster/routing/allocation/RerouteExplanation.java 70.00% <0.00%> (-30.00%) ⬇️
... and 482 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

@owaiskazi19 owaiskazi19 requested a review from dbwiddis December 6, 2022 16:00
@saratvemulapalli
Copy link
Member

@seth-priya thank you for contributing the change. Is there a way to add a test for these changes?
I know we do verify if the tars are generated for each architecture/distribution.

Copy link
Member

@dbwiddis dbwiddis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good... one fix needed (comments) and one suggestion (constants).

Agree with the question about tests -- I suspect we can at least test the enum determination by manipulating os.arch property.

@@ -260,6 +260,7 @@ static class Arch {
m.put("amd64", new Arch(0xC000003E, 0x3FFFFFFF, 57, 58, 59, 322, 317));
m.put("aarch64", new Arch(0xC00000B7, 0xFFFFFFFF, 1079, 1071, 221, 281, 277));
m.put("s390x", new Arch(0x80000016, 0xFFFFFFFF, 2, 190, 11, 354, 348));
m.put("ppc64le", new Arch(0xC0000015, 0xFFFFFFFF, 2, 189, 11, 362, 358));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

(Preference) I would really like if at least some these values could be made constants. I see above they correspond to AUDIT_ARCH_XXX, __NR_xxx, etc.

@seth-priya
Copy link
Contributor Author

seth-priya commented Dec 8, 2022

thanks @saratvemulapalli @dbwiddis for your feedback, I will work on it and get back soon.

Signed-off-by: Priya Seth <[email protected]>
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 8, 2022

Gradle Check (Jenkins) Run Completed with:

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 9, 2022

Gradle Check (Jenkins) Run Completed with:

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Gradle Check (Jenkins) Run Completed with:

Copy link
Member

@saratvemulapalli saratvemulapalli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @seth-priya , looks like inherently gradle scripts are testing the expected distributions.

@saratvemulapalli saratvemulapalli added enhancement Enhancement or improvement to existing feature or request backport 2.x Backport to 2.x branch labels Dec 16, 2022
@saratvemulapalli
Copy link
Member

@seth-priya could you update CHANGELOG.md and take care of conflicts. We should be good to merge.

@seth-priya
Copy link
Contributor Author

thanks @saratvemulapalli for the feedback and review comments , agree on the test, addressed the conflict

@seth-priya seth-priya changed the title add support for ppc64le architecture (draft) add support for ppc64le architecture Dec 16, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Gradle Check (Jenkins) Run Completed with:

@saratvemulapalli saratvemulapalli merged commit d76adf3 into opensearch-project:main Dec 19, 2022
@andrross andrross added backport 2.x Backport to 2.x branch and removed backport 2.x Backport to 2.x branch labels Feb 7, 2023
@opensearch-trigger-bot
Copy link
Contributor

The backport to 2.x failed:

The process '/usr/bin/git' failed with exit code 128

To backport manually, run these commands in your terminal:

# Fetch latest updates from GitHub
git fetch
# Create a new working tree
git worktree add ../.worktrees/backport-2.x 2.x
# Navigate to the new working tree
pushd ../.worktrees/backport-2.x
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport/backport-5459-to-2.x
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 d76adf3504e3001a84d53177af8ea36af2cc65c1
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport/backport-5459-to-2.x
# Go back to the original working tree
popd
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove ../.worktrees/backport-2.x

Then, create a pull request where the base branch is 2.x and the compare/head branch is backport/backport-5459-to-2.x.

reta pushed a commit to reta/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2023
reta pushed a commit to reta/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2023
reta pushed a commit to reta/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2023
andrross pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2023
Signed-off-by: Andriy Redko <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Priya Seth <[email protected]>
andrross pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2023
Signed-off-by: Andriy Redko <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Priya Seth <[email protected]>
reta added a commit to reta/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Feb 8, 2023
reta added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 8, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport 2.x Backport to 2.x branch enhancement Enhancement or improvement to existing feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants