From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu>
Cc: ci@dpdk.org, ahassick@iol.unh.edu,
"aaron.conole@redhat.com" <aaron.conole@redhat.com>,
alialnu@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] tools: check for pending test status when parsing emails
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 18:08:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2000540.8hb0ThOEGa@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJvnSUCS53QuadT6zsT4R6SZ_VzhZgjLXm6fzDCT9KdFHKoRJQ@mail.gmail.com>
20/05/2024 23:36, Patrick Robb:
> 2. UNH Lab triggers some testrun pipelines in our CI system (jenkins).
> The first action the pipeline takes is to create in our database a
> test result record for each testrun, setting the status to PENDING. It
> is important to note that one patchwork context, Like
> "iol-compile-amd64-testing," may consist of many individual testruns,
> each for different distros, hardware, environment etc.
> 3. When each testrun completes, it will send a report to Patchwork
> with the new result (pass or fail). When it does this it will update
> the context's results table, changing the environment's result from
> pending to pass/fail. So, when the first report comes in for, say,
> context "iol-compile-amd64-testing," you would see 1 pass/fail, 12
> pending, or similar. Then, as subsequent testruns complete, and report
> their results, the updated table comes with the new report. The
> overall context result (the _Testing {PASS/FAIL/PENDING}_ at the top
> of the test report email) is determined in the manner you might
> expect, i.e. if there is at least one testrun fail result, overall
> context is fail, else if there is at least one pending result, overall
> context is pending, else if all results are passing, overall result is
> passing. As an example, when testing is nearly complete, the top of
> the report email may look like this:
>
> _Testing PENDING_
>
> Branch: tags/v22.11
>
> a409653a123bf105970a25c594711a3cdc44d139 --> testing pass
>
> Test environment and result as below:
>
> +------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
> | Environment | dpdk_meson_compile |
> +====================================+====================+
> | Ubuntu 20.04 ARM SVE | PASS |
> +------------------------------------+--------------------+
> | Debian 12 with MUSDK | PENDING |
> +------------------------------------+--------------------+
> | Fedora 37 (ARM) | PASS |
> +------------------------------------+--------------------+
> | Ubuntu 20.04 (ARM) | PASS |
> +------------------------------------+--------------------+
> | Fedora 38 (ARM) | PASS |
> +------------------------------------+--------------------+
> | Fedora 39 (ARM) | PENDING |
> +------------------------------------+--------------------+
> | Debian 12 (arm) | PASS |
> +------------------------------------+--------------------+
> | CentOS Stream 9 (ARM) | PASS |
> +------------------------------------+--------------------+
> | Debian 11 (Buster) (ARM) | PASS |
> +------------------------------------+--------------------+
> | Ubuntu 20.04 ARM GCC Cross Compile | PASS |
> +------------------------------------+--------------------+
It is quite strange to receive a new email each time a line of the table is updated.
> 4. Eventually, all testruns are complete for a patchwork context, and
> the table switches from pending to pass or fail.
>
> This does not slow the delivery of results, nor does it increase the
> number of test report emails sent. We still send only 1 email per
> testrun.
I had not realised that so many emails are sent.
I thought it was 1 patchwork context == 1 email.
> This way it is plainly visible to the user when all testing is
> complete, and it also flags for the submitter and for CI people if
> some infra failure prevents a testrun from completing, or from a
> result being properly emailed, etc. The idea is to provide more
> complete status updates and check against infra fails better, but
> without any adverse effects in user experience or load on the email
> server.
I understand it gives a new information: test is pending.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-21 16:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-17 19:22 [PATCH 0/1] pending results parsing for DPDK patchwork Patrick Robb
2024-05-17 19:22 ` [PATCH 1/1] tools: check for pending test status when parsing emails Patrick Robb
2024-05-17 19:24 ` Patrick Robb
2024-05-20 6:08 ` Ali Alnubani
2024-05-20 19:03 ` Thomas Monjalon
2024-05-20 21:36 ` Patrick Robb
2024-05-21 16:08 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2024-05-23 21:47 ` Patrick Robb
2024-05-21 17:23 ` Aaron Conole
2024-05-23 21:59 ` [PATCH v2] " Patrick Robb
2024-06-14 16:59 ` Ali Alnubani
2024-06-18 13:35 ` Aaron Conole
2024-06-25 19:34 ` Patrick Robb
2024-06-26 19:31 ` Adam Hassick
2024-06-27 16:48 ` Ali Alnubani
2024-06-27 17:04 ` Patrick Robb
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2000540.8hb0ThOEGa@thomas \
--to=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=aaron.conole@redhat.com \
--cc=ahassick@iol.unh.edu \
--cc=alialnu@nvidia.com \
--cc=ci@dpdk.org \
--cc=probb@iol.unh.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).