Contributing to pipeline CICD for ppc64le arch

[pranavpandit1]

Hello,

My team is working on a request of "Porting Kubeflow to IBM Power (ppc64le)"
For the same purpose, we want to contribute to CICD for the pipeline repository for ppc64le architecture.
Kindly provide the details of how to access existing CI builds, files, logs, etc.

for more details, reference the link Kubeflow Umbrella issue

[jlyaoyuli]

@pranavpandit1 We suggest you to pull the changes from our website and make your own CICD pipeline, because our current testing infra in Google Cloud (GKE), and we don't have the access to IBM Power. Feel free to reopen this if you have any idea or suggestion.

[adilhusain-s]

@jlyaoyuli
we can add support for ppc64le using qemu. Checkout this YAML:
yaml file
but I haven't tested this approach as I don't have access to google cloud platform. How can I get access to GCP?

If possible, I suggest that we should migrate to github action. this will make easier for anyone to contribute to CICD as github action doesn't require any subscription and it is free to use for individual account.

would like to know, why are we not using GITHUB action?

[pranavpandit1]

@jlyaoyuli: I second Adil's thought about using GitHub actions as it will be easier to contribute.
Any specific reasons for not using GitHub Actions?

[lehrig]

/reopen

I now added a design proposal to the tracking issue kubeflow/community#781. We want to target most of the KFP components next and already got good community feedback on this (see upvotes in kubeflow/community#781).

@zijianjoy, can you review the design document? Thanks!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nGUvLonahoLogfWCHsoUOZl-s77YtPEiCjWBVlZjJHo/edit?usp=sharing

[google-oss-prow]

@lehrig: Reopened this issue.

In response to this:

/reopen

I now added a design proposal to the tracking issue kubeflow/community#781. We want to target most of the KFP components next and already got good community feedback on this (see upvotes in kubeflow/community#781).

@zijianjoy, can you review the design document? Thanks!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nGUvLonahoLogfWCHsoUOZl-s77YtPEiCjWBVlZjJHo/edit?usp=sharing

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[lehrig]

@zijianjoy, @gkcalat - any news on this?

[lehrig]

@chensun - can you help driving this a bit quicker? my team is ready & would like to proceed...

I think we need to get these 2 questions answered clearly:

1. can & should we enable GitHub Action builds for KFP projects to improve consistency with the general Kubeflow ecosystem & make things like multi-arch easier possible?
2. if we don't migrate to GitHub Actions, how can we help making multi-arch builds (x86 + ppc64le) in the current CI possible?

Note that we have lots of support driving this forward (see kubeflow/community#781) but are struggling to get these questions answered clearly.

The design document & a detailed discussion is here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nGUvLonahoLogfWCHsoUOZl-s77YtPEiCjWBVlZjJHo/edit?usp=sharing

Thank you!

[lehrig]

We recently discussed this topic in the KubeFlow Pipelines community call:

• notes are here: http://bit.ly/kfp-meeting-notes
• recording is here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NNOHR205gaZgJBVk9qXBzLea6ygfGxaC/view

We were pointed to the postsubmits file to trigger builds: https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/oss-test-infra/tree/master/prow/prowjobs/kubeflow/pipelines

Accordingly, we are now assessing the integration ppc64le workers into this CI (prow). Here's the issue for that: GoogleCloudPlatform/oss-test-infra#1972

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[lehrig]

Still waiting on progress within GoogleCloudPlatform/oss-test-infra#1972

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically closed because it has not had recent activity. Please comment "/reopen" to reopen it.