From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
Cc: ci@dpdk.org, aconole@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] CI reliability
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2021 15:34:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3134763.gfDLbUYdgI@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOE1vsNViYvarRfGwWuCV03p0nbu_kOgVuUGMqgV=0jKOOjHsw@mail.gmail.com>
02/06/2021 14:55, Lincoln Lavoie:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> The unit tests that fail are nearly always the same specific unit test.
> Aaron addressed some of these in a patch that has yet to be applied to DPDK
> (cycles_autotest and test_alarm). The other one that we still consistently
> fail is func_reentrancy_autotest. It seems like that unit test case can
> pass in one run and fail in the next. We have not been able to determine a
> root cause for it yet. Maybe that is something the devs could help look
> into.
Yes definitely we should help and apply fixes in DPDK.
> Other failures have been caused by DTS. As part of the plan, we've been
> trying to upgrade the DTS deployments on the system, so as the other
> changes are made, we can easily pull those in. However, pulling in the new
> DTS version has also pulled in bugs that exist in that version. For
> example, on the stats test suite, it was changed to not skip
> the test_xstats_check_vf when no VMs are configured on the system, so when
> the overall test suite was being run, it failed on the bare metal where
> there are VMs configured right now. Every time the lab has to upgrade DTS,
> we run the risk of introducing these types of failures, which then take
> time to debug and fix.
For non-transient issues, we should not deploy a new DTS if there are regressions.
Is it possible to deploy an older patched version of DTS?
> On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 3:27 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> > I see a lot of failures in the CI, especially unit tests run in UNH IOL.
> > It seems to fail for several weeks but did not investigate more.
> > What is the cause and what is the plan?
> > Should we rely on CI results?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-02 13:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-02 7:27 Thomas Monjalon
2021-06-02 12:55 ` Lincoln Lavoie
2021-06-02 13:34 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-05-24 9:50 Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-26 20:27 ` Lincoln Lavoie
2020-05-26 21:10 ` Thomas Monjalon
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=3134763.gfDLbUYdgI@thomas \
--to=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=aconole@redhat.com \
--cc=ci@dpdk.org \
--cc=lylavoie@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).