Hmm yeah I’m not sure why it ran on patch set 2 but not the last couple… Seth, anyone?


We might need one of the maintainers to clear it for CI execution, it’s an extra unfortunate security requirement we have on the test pool, otherwise its fully automated




From: SPDK [] On Behalf Of Zhipeng Huang
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 4:04 PM
To: Storage Performance Development Kit <>
Subject: Re: [SPDK] Add py-spdk client for SPDK


Paul, the problem is that Wewe's later patches doesn't trigger CI at all. Is it how it supposed to work that we should fix the problem before hand ?

Since in OpenStack or kubernetes CI should be triggered everytime the patches come in.


On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 5:39 AM, Luse, Paul E <> wrote:

Hi WeWe



So wrt which repo, I didn’t see that but we don’t really have a precedent for subprojects like that.  I’ll let one of the maintainers comment on the options but I believe they would be (a) maintain on your own elsewhere or (b) include in SPDK like any other code.  Option (b) is really for “core” SPDK elements that make sense for most use cases and a python binding may or may not fit, it clearly isn’t out of the question in my mind though as it’s not directly tied to OpenStack.


On your patch not passing, see the screenshot below where I highlighted the -1 from the CI system.  If you click on that link it will take you to the results and you can see the failure I mention.  Have you tried running the locally?







From: SPDK [] On Behalf Of We We
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 10:26 AM

To: Storage Performance Development Kit <>
Subject: Re: [SPDK] Add py-spdk client for SPDK


Hi, Paul

I am sorry.  Is  the question on my patch you mentioned  the following Q1?

Q1: is your intention to propose this as part of the SPDK repo or do you intent to maintain this in your own repo and are simply asking for review comments?

If so, I see it and response to you on the patch.  Maybe you didn’t see it. 


1. About Q1, my idea is to treat the py-spdk as another subrepo in the SPDK community. For example: SPDK repo -->, py-spdk repo --> Am I reasonable


2. About a copy of Thank you for your careful review, the py-spdk doesn’t need to modify and copy the files of SPDK, I have deleted the and updated the new patch. Please visit it.


3. About my patch didn’t pass CI.  My patch didn’t show nothing including the “verified -1”. I didn’t know whether the CI executed, so I can’t track anything down.  Is there anyone who met this problem?






2018117日,下午10:32Luse, Paul E <> 写道:


Hi WeWe,


Thanks for the trello update, did you see my question on your patch? I went to look specifically at the changes to existing files to start with and it appears that your patch includes a copy of basically duplicating it within the repo.  Did I miss something or is that what you intended?


Wrt  question on why your patch didn’t pass CI, it’s pretty easy to track these things down most of the time.  In the review, click on the link below where it says verified -1 and you will see a webpage with the status of each of the test machines.  Many of the are red and indicate failure.  Click on one and drill down to find the builg.log file and you’ll see some formatting issues:


========== Backtrace start: ==========


in ./ -> main()



   19  ./configure $config_params


   21  timing_enter check_format

   22  if [ $SPDK_RUN_CHECK_FORMAT -eq 1 ]; then

=> 23          ./scripts/

   24  fi

   25  timing_exit check_format


   27  timing_enter build_kmod

   28  if [ $SPDK_BUILD_IOAT_KMOD -eq 1 ]; then



========== Backtrace end ==========


You can run the script, ./scripts/, locally and correct the errors and resubmit.  We always ask that developers run this scripts in advance to make sure things are formatted.  Depending on whether the maintainers think the SPDK repo makes sense for this patch you’ll need some test code also – there is clearly a lot of value in this patch though and regardless of whether it lands here or is maintained elsewhere!


Use this list or the patch review if you have more questions on getting it to pass.







From: SPDK [] On Behalf Of We We
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 5:24 AM
To: Storage Performance Development Kit <>
Subject: Re: [SPDK] Add py-spdk client for SPDK


Hi, all

I have submitted the introduction of py-spdk on trello, please visit it. I will be grateful to your kindness.






 2018116日,上午11:30We We <> 写道:


Hi, all

I have submitted the py-spdk(written in python) for more than six days. Why the code-review couldn’t pass and show nothing?

Is there anyone who can help me?





 2018110日,下午9:46We We <> 写道:


Hi, all

I have submitted the py-spdk code on, please take some time to visit it, I will be very grateful to you. 

The py-spdk is client which can help the upper-level app to communicate with the SPDK-based app (such as: nvmf_tgt, vhost, iscsi_tgt, etc.). Should I submit it into the other repo I rebuild rather than SPDK repo? Because I think it is a relatively independent kit upon the SPDK. 


If you have some thoughts about the py-spdk, please share with me.




SPDK mailing list



SPDK mailing list


SPDK mailing list



Zhipeng (Howard) Huang


Standard Engineer

IT Standard & Patent/IT Product Line

Huawei Technologies Co,. Ltd

Office: Huawei Industrial Base, Longgang, Shenzhen



Research Assistant

Mobile Ad-Hoc Network Lab, Calit2

University of California, Irvine

Office: Calit2 Building Room 2402


OpenStack, OPNFV, OpenDaylight, OpenCompute Aficionado