From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF3A9A0C45 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:23:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C06814069E; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:23:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD3140141 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:23:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724D55C0176; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 03:23:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 22 Sep 2021 03:23:04 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm2; bh= 0IktMGGvEddwVe3t5xN24YO7og5cpUdXWAiugiw5J6k=; b=lWf3hsW5yPltg8vP EkfJG3VBbiCqe4aVHMEvQ6pX7WB+UTNGEp9zxNRfi0dH+3yqS02OraFwcwvEDI4D BVXFFtp9fe5PeKspghniDREWMZa4ENJBwsmSxbDnw5D+PsYPSdw1RtsfuXAsy0WF ZsKiTLVC6kESO359qZbqZQyjeXb1B8eeys2lKaCGjkDqzxxveai/jXIo39eTgy6q sgAqMkg1TNd9CR/V/wRz+UaOTVKEwU2WS72/BW2e08Tm8Cs0UWAUIMkuLofzuV+C L3wFRHMgw7rEqqdHkCbwHmXfg0+246HVM/7pfSxLqpLUyIHkBpbyB7qyFlr2nCLQ 89MsaQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=0IktMGGvEddwVe3t5xN24YO7og5cpUdXWAiugiw5J 6k=; b=iPg9WGCRWpmYh+ctZNzUBOtPxUMcVxjBZ5KHOGPVs5NURHaVaeiX/xWKj xRz2QtqGO8XRWu/5nghC4lYn3YseYB6GfqcdeW8VhAmvk/GNQFIKLFVKb0BjhIkJ hXP9TYJgFM88GAfG9HHrrfIAjbFxQRll4/de6pf5e/l/31SePMpDfLgtB3CwNyWv y898wObOMUMHf6luOn85fcsBFJk4YCgxG3h4AEC+6AZoyCx981kQyo+2dasuWZ1N y+KPQeEiHqEp6py6XsRvxUMTd0POl4bvakDDSpRx5MSXwfOTE7jt2zK8OihFqgTx 1luzSzBMUwQnpCdqDx3XZ8wEUKBUw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddrudeiiedguddufecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthhqredttddtjeenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedvkeetveeihfegfedtfeejueekkeekueevgfejuedviedvvdev uefgteevtdefveenucffohhmrghinhepughpughkrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuih iivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhho nhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 03:23:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Chen, Zhaoyan" Cc: Lincoln Lavoie , David Marchand , "Tu, Lijuan" , sys_stv , "ci@dpdk.org" , Aaron Conole , "Yigit, Ferruh" Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:23:00 +0200 Message-ID: <2731761.8huRqIiH2e@thomas> In-Reply-To: <64221AA6-3141-4411-A5D4-65251507A2E4@intel.com> References: <64221AA6-3141-4411-A5D4-65251507A2E4@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] Failing pf_smoke test X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "ci" 22/09/2021 08:17, Chen, Zhaoyan: > Thanks Lincoln and David to reminder. >=20 > Actually, this is a real issue on main branch. >=20 > The pf_smoke failed due to dpdk bad commit id: b3d95f1817288ca228f09b9164= d6d3ff6249b175(has been merged into main branch). Why a patch failing CI has been merged? Is it because we get used to have CI failing and don't pay attention? > Currently, its fixed patch(http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?ser= ies=3D18963) are provided by Dev and tested passed by CI, but not merged in= to main branch due to share code limitation. > Test report: [dpdk-test-report] (Testing) |SUCCESS| pw(98992-98993) sid(1= 8963) job(PER_PATCH_BUILD7871) [v2, 2/2] net/iavf: remove support for IP fr= agment default RSS) >=20 > I don=E2=80=99t know when the hotfix patch could be merged. Before that, = shall CI be disabled for this real issue? Everybody, every contributors ask why CI is failing for their patch. So yes, such test should have been disabled as early as you discover the pr= oblem please. The right process is to fill a bugzilla ticket to be referenced in the fix.