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 D2543A0350 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:24:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 964B11BEA7; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:24:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5D571BEA3 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:24:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C53890F; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 06:24:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 06:24:01 -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=fm1; bh= Sb+edm5dmVffYxvyf8BQmid9PAimbLSFeJ9G4fBwC/Q=; b=gV/kzqDh2a39gdra 5yXvtAZz0xEidBjx7CwwhwmgHq86fYvQALI/HiYKZF9EdjXyAumGU1QPOLCVTLzR 7mQu755cdKTz3G7DYZNeiqtZhMgTQEO569AJg3B8YgHxN+CpC8FTUhtegZh5Pnxc FKqQXoNlArLAYsv6CHJyExQCKEusgKb36fw97qvMNg/n6GUFd/mOJq3kYjn1JfJZ ucuiwwv/BNLiHTYjlc2DfTl3dmI2I+kSsAeeH9Il0xWXMRA2hhKD3rOh36JHZU/k Xvmxbuxmc6SaGV+7/ypt7zgQ2PwSMxznTb3Il+qOFocP82dceJPZ3s/VamEGjBUe 6rqSxw== 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=Sb+edm5dmVffYxvyf8BQmid9PAimbLSFeJ9G4fBwC /Q=; b=PEKooOJsenVW6WM0yr71yStgq5VOQN1fQuGTPl0/hiZz9B5oRTIqoJ4Yh df22BDAmVYa52KC7CcYdzj15kUpl/Gd2qxZolBo7d+w3zSWqvaByQrIyNCDzo4gK WokLrLAstXVEnYYAbxHajsvFGBEUUeETRy5NIaw1bqMVetkXeNipi/mTXIBR0mrp MOCuESLThIr696Wwa/NRHrbQGn6sYrw4i6mGzTgXtJAkvSg4I3BqwZ9v+Cc04Rjo fgDBIcw7D+yp9NiM3BrMfB9oAFJg87dE1A1yu/DGw9vn4nL3J+u8rh/HfCG0olP9 XZ7yHddA+MKrm/hSoMWVq3cZsRS7w== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrudeluddgvdelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu ieeivdffgeehnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghruf hiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl ohhnrdhnvght 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 57742328005A; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 06:24:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Chen, Zhaoyan" Cc: ci@dpdk.org, sys_stv , David Marchand Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:23:59 +0200 Message-ID: <6471530.9lzsYzkM2H@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] Failures reported by Intel CI for series 10551 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" 26/06/2020 09:43, David Marchand: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 5:03 AM Chen, Zhaoyan wrote: > > > > Hi, David, > > > > For your question, "Is it normal to see all patches with the exact same test report?" > > Yes, we always test a series, rather than a single patch. You can see the exact same report > > on any patch in a series. (it's convenient, you don't need backward to search > > the header of the series, then check result) > > Convenience is subject to interpretation :-). > Other CI systems send a single report which is more sane for me. I think these tests have 2 purposes: - sending quick error feedback to the author - check that all is green before merging In both cases we don't need to have the same report duplicated, because we check for failures in all patches anyway. I suggest sending the series report only on the last patch of the series.