From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1C0DA0567 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 09:20:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA69C1BF7F; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 09:20:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B2302BE6 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 09:20:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEC925D8; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 04:20:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 04:20:20 -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=mesmtp; bh=1W8fkPxU40rv6a+AJVpFjfS0HXmmC/uggsRVR9qAXXw=; b=jjRSlSnyuBdx uVeXyTVZxZjRYHwLofIIYkga7BSj4RCHpCdLe12FJHyOkZMjel7QS18BgN9DBmXM xjoKwNDMIymYJOFYXwbDo6HUwHX9xAKmiMQCka/NHIn5Y2vuOLZWSgmou6oFQuFR I0oZLjcaaFTX5SGxYHnUvNCIFXF+d4Y= 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=fm2; bh=1W8fkPxU40rv6a+AJVpFjfS0HXmmC/uggsRVR9qAX Xw=; b=tnLzQM2Hq97eDdpK1upSmYPtO6glhAZnnxS61QONn2NJ33ZTvKe8asCbI re337B7GjbwyazSgi5xF+vHUImqmD6J1EKFSLzuInawdfqbLRO8NHxmx9WQmHmMD ZUU6CLZfEhGdJ0CwGSZxNeVp5X3MzTjQCJJ5gsrgmV/Iw9/7zTOl10RJNruuLA8I k4H6r4bcCv+S+8d9gWkzTIttMRSCOKfHLhAOwzECd5vr/65ix8u5JKfQ8TMQ2ldl g2S5pMSXmRAPWW9Knhq72ghn6Tlkmtrcx1i1E9JbCE3yJlrDbYwFmZaJFnFB3IdH hTmGUmpDUPxKSXOPYSk7PTPVBUrXA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvuddguddulecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc fkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfr rghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A3CEE328005D; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 04:20:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Chen, Zhaoyan" Cc: David Marchand , ci@dpdk.org, sys_stv Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 09:20:14 +0100 Message-ID: <3892782.1IzOArtZ34@xps> In-Reply-To: <9DEEADBC57E43F4DA73B571777FECECA41EFB97D@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <9DEEADBC57E43F4DA73B571777FECECA41EFB97D@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] Failure in Intel CI X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 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" 11/03/2020 03:07, Chen, Zhaoyan: > Hi, David, > > The applying failure is caused by our CI is download patches from patchwork. (it's a little slow and unstable in PRC) > > We are working on separating "CI exception" and "real failure". But 1 question, for patchwork report, > do you think what kind of result status for any exception in CI workflow? If you cannot run the test, you should not report it at all.