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 6E7B7A09EF for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 14:08:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 653A4140CD7; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 14:08:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B7CC140CB5 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 14:08:30 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1610370510; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=HhOAdn6JUeGLhFM7hIhHAwEg08WcPGp/a271KwcghPc=; b=daoXmFUVBL0Vuf2a/NM2ZV2oqu6DKPDvk1iqS+/Dz1ICKukYlGM8UnCKm0M/jetNC0PHLr 9QsEYKu2RXLARoH4sSJ22nDxkjfXcA7LHGHEdwScNyx5z5ClGAAXeT+5damcw2r+ZL38gT nJpVLtp/WuYxqxpKwDszwoemSAelgcg= Received: from mail-vk1-f200.google.com (mail-vk1-f200.google.com [209.85.221.200]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-89-QtNu1jPwNtuSmkkHzFHdhw-1; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 08:08:21 -0500 X-MC-Unique: QtNu1jPwNtuSmkkHzFHdhw-1 Received: by mail-vk1-f200.google.com with SMTP id x134so8123568vkd.17 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 05:08:21 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HhOAdn6JUeGLhFM7hIhHAwEg08WcPGp/a271KwcghPc=; b=VMSnXWWOrKcf/yLCFeP7qZPVkNnRIpVH0NMGM1a5dtmjMucwdSlOYYhK8shSesv1Qb VBF5Bfc0BMig3JxEIbORngtThK33c3xxCZ1rdV/wUAsQlfWlyovqVhXQVCmtoNMVuOYy 31QQZfWcDxsjgjDzwd8sIO0kHXWzYQybFuBLRWdKhUpejdv9i7uRboIs5km65GWXkuEq pHWEyOLHrRy+D5fkCrJf7tTWjDhpOSd8e6Ix3R5imkTXjJOuom9/6iLmhCiTkW03yvQt lKsnf0syYbGg+f3zLIoF7dy8/fcuX2LRi3aWnkdKnMm6oLSXDe1+thi6FqPznldQgvZc xZtA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532EEHO1n2aOrk2Bhb42YlNef38qgj9CNdcU5Ybvuia6SY9huT4w PEVDtCIwzEU/w+UhzIYBCBGmlUWCYH/n7rQX8SrPrYWkGQ4FmyxjhTSo7GkEjjZCQyufvKl+uyq O1Ot2jjn/4djFTkC1OA== X-Received: by 2002:ab0:44c6:: with SMTP id n64mr11921819uan.53.1610370501178; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 05:08:21 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzn/zNsGMYxRxwO7gePiuAWGUKqZ5zAfqBBIeFai7GBR1LYzmJZoD129Ci6scu/3sCK2xX8SLJXMbNwSvriuYQ= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:44c6:: with SMTP id n64mr11921799uan.53.1610370500970; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 05:08:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 14:08:09 +0100 Message-ID: To: dpdklab , Lincoln Lavoie Cc: dev , ci@dpdk.org, Lukasz Wojciechowski , Aaron Conole , David Hunt Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] distributor test failure in UNH CI on ARM 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" Hey guys, On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:14 AM David Marchand wrote: > UNH CI is raising failures on a ARM server for the distributor test: > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/15077/ > > Worker 59 handled 0 packets > Worker 60 handled 0 packets > Worker 61 handled 0 packets > Worker 62 handled 0 packets > Sanity test with non-zero hashes done > === testing big burst (burst) === > line 258: Missing packets, expected 783 > Test Failed > RTE>> > --- stderr --- Looking at the dashboard, I did not see a passing instance of this unit test for ARM. Did it ever work? -- David Marchand