Skip to content

Conversation

@grom72
Copy link
Contributor

@grom72 grom72 commented Jan 12, 2026

Update the default EL version for the DAOS master validation to 9.7

It is a base for other el9.7 upgrade related changes introduced by daos-stack/daos#17376

This PR fix an issue with the CI_BUILD_PACKAGES_ONLY that should be now ignored in case of regular builds (no separate builds for RPM).

Cancel-prev-build: false
Priority: 2

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
Priority: 2

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
@grom72
Copy link
Contributor Author

grom72 commented Jan 16, 2026

Validation status:

@grom72 grom72 marked this pull request as ready for review January 16, 2026 12:30
Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
- add all possible cases for el9.7 and el9 related stages to skip logic
- ignore CI_BUILD_PACKAGES_ONLY for regular builds as they are now used
  for RPM building

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
@grom72 grom72 changed the title SRE-3522 ci: update to el9.7 SRE-3534 ci: update to el9.7 Jan 16, 2026
JohnMalmberg
JohnMalmberg previously approved these changes Jan 16, 2026
Copy link
Collaborator

@JohnMalmberg JohnMalmberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

While this will work, I have some recommendations for helping to future proof this.

assert(call('el8', 'master') == '8.8')
assert(call('el9', 'master') == '9.4')
assert(call('el9', 'master') == '9.7')
assert(call('el9', '2.6') == '9.4')
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should get this bumped to 9.7 also. We can not support older el-9 in hardware CI.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We can't, as we can not build 2.6 on 9.7
But we do not need as we do not test 2.6 against el9 at all.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We do test release/2.6 against EL9. In https://jenkins.daos.hpc.amslabs.hpecorp.net/job/daos-stack/job/daos/job/release%252F2.6/226/pipeline-overview/ we build DAOS RPMs against EL9. Also, the daily-2.6-testing and weekly-2.6.-testing branches run a Functional VM stage on EL9. In https://jenkins.daos.hpc.amslabs.hpecorp.net/job/daos-stack/job/daos/job/daily-2.6-testing/179/ it ran on 9.7.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@grom72 grom72 Jan 21, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes, but the problem is with RPM build which does not work on 9.7 (but works on 9.4).

Upgrade VM tests to use EL9.7 is configured directly in the restore_vm_partition.sh script where 9.7 is used as default.

case 'el9':
provision_script += 'EL_8'
break
case 'el9':
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Future enhancement is to just be "EL", as EL-[8-10] do not appear to have much differences, so that this can simplify the number of scripts.

prReposContains('ubuntu20', jobName()) ||
skip_stage_pragma('build-ubuntu20-rpm')
case 'Build on CentOS 8':
case 'Build on EL 8':
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Apparently these removals are not affecting Release 2.6?
Release 2.6 should really have been using "EL 8" and not "CentOS 8"

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It is redundant code.

!run_default_skipped_stage('test-el-8.8-rpms')) ||
(rpmTestVersion() != '') ||
stageAlreadyPassed()
case 'Test RPMs on EL 9.7':
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should handle 'Test RPMs on EL 9" also.

I wonder if the string constant could be replaced with a function that uses a regex so that we don't need to specify a specific point release and edit this file every 6 months.

skip_stage_pragma('build-el9-rpm') ||
skip_stage_pragma('test') ||
skip_stage_pragma('test-rpms') ||
skip_stage_pragma('test-el-9.7-rpms') ||
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We have less than 6 months before el-9.7 is out of support.
If we are have to support checking specific point release, we need to have support for ".0 through .10" for EL based OSes. And in the past RHEL has issued ".11" releases.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is why I want to completely exclude versions from the stage names.

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
New depth == 100

Doc-only: true

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
Doc-only: true

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
This reverts commit 1e655f8.

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
+ upgrade default el from el7 to el9

Priority: 2

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki <tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com>
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.

4 participants