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 83381A04BB for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 525DE1B3D9; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-ed1-f53.google.com (mail-ed1-f53.google.com [209.85.208.53]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3CFE1B2A9 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-ed1-f53.google.com with SMTP id l24so13528571edj.8 for ; Tue, 06 Oct 2020 06:23:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hBO2crwKzPUtHsO9QAxgbrvcQl1A5hF/L+X5cTp8nmo=; b=Hh6U43RiW2akQfOAcR2tVlyrcnB96N3sEN/bhOB/yAwyYWjm8YRXQRI5zzUGsv33+q M7lymFTU7ZcgVh0HItb86vweGimpizMmvIslODuPXYyNPGS52q+Yyz+bfQJrGPIs2JrF WbwCAJeJtMJRsfd6J4J779vnhLJl0NZ/3pW9k= 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=hBO2crwKzPUtHsO9QAxgbrvcQl1A5hF/L+X5cTp8nmo=; b=lbSizHNRdoRYL5+RCrKG1n1yon0p5IRUjVXnPZFifqEWunk1CCQytLE0TuA813XIjc 6tizBwCFOeYHA0Cpo9X51e0X6kbJ86Zv+jNZ6eVjhmt7nVlK/4wKSYvxMQRICMsoPUg8 60yLDxo61Dbt6cVBSik04FoOthorxD8gJtLFhMVwKXvB9dnkPaYYLzP6SO4t0vE1EcBG DTlQ2cJtjbRZj7m0C7h5NjNEu+U4zDUsyl1pHPKRgHY5C1i07LV9+SlRESghEd/4NWLI dabHXwPyxuWwMElLgm60WFljUMc6PIxv36UeASCBP+zNtIjpuadLKOdUeHrJlY9xOO1/ ZedQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530a4OVSKxTfCTB3ROErnp2guceWHTHlU6cAGMjWItzX/fXEfHYZ UuKuuhsA/tZN8Kld3q5xHzLdC7Ws2vl+gQMYjKeO/A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx8Svt6RXvmAZOeWnJ/Vg6fx9g2PCMxKyCdx0B5Q4Ae9XjSxJ7e5nhi7Hv0KHgWrKoBNGB5zBKwZHa/a1j71gc= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:c155:: with SMTP id r21mr5598960edp.140.1601990616541; Tue, 06 Oct 2020 06:23:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4539298.X23b7sF8FS@thomas> In-Reply-To: <4539298.X23b7sF8FS@thomas> From: Lincoln Lavoie Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 09:22:27 -0400 Message-ID: To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: David Marchand , Brandon Lo , dpdklab , ci@dpdk.org, Bruce Richardson , Trishan de Lanerolle , James Hendergart Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a213f605b1008147" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdklab] Re: Fedora Rawhide Meson Compile Testing - DPDK Compile Warning 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" --000000000000a213f605b1008147 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Thomas, For Rawhide, the failure is fixed, but I don't think it's ported to all branches yet, so how would you want to handle that. Those branches will catch up and the failure would "disappear." For GCC 11, that's bleeding edge, so it's more about future proofing and how that plan is put together. Cheers, Lincoln On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 9:03 AM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 06/10/2020 14:52, Lincoln Lavoie: > > For Rawhide, our plan is to mark the failures as warnings instead, until > > things catch up on the other branches. Similarly, if we add something > like > > GCC 11 compile, I would suggest those failures are also a warning for > now. > > Sorry, I disagree with this plan. > As a non-regression tool, we are looking for green lights. > If a new test is not passing, it should not be added > until the original issue is fixed. > > Please don't add tests if they are failing, giving warning or error. > > Thanks > > > -- *Lincoln Lavoie* Senior Engineer, Broadband Technologies 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824 lylavoie@iol.unh.edu https://www.iol.unh.edu +1-603-674-2755 (m) --000000000000a213f605b1008147 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi = Thomas,

For Rawhide, the = failure is fixed, but I don't think it's ported to all branches yet= , so how would you want to handle that.=C2=A0 Those branches will catch up = and the failure=C2=A0would "disappear."

For GCC 11, that's bleeding edge, so it's = more about future proofing and how that plan is put=C2=A0together.

Cheers,
Lincoln
On Tue, O= ct 6, 2020 at 9:03 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
06/10/2020 14:52, Lincoln Lavoie:
> For Rawhide, our plan is to mark the failures as warnings instead, unt= il
> things catch up on the other branches.=C2=A0 Similarly, if we add some= thing like
> GCC 11 compile, I would suggest those failures are also a warning for = now.

Sorry, I disagree with this plan.
As a non-regression tool, we are looking for green lights.
If a new test is not passing, it should not be added
until the original issue is fixed.

Please don't add tests if they are failing, giving warning or error.
Thanks




--
Lincoln Lavoie
Seni= or Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Dur= ham, NH 03824
+1-603-674-2755 = (m)

<= /div>
--000000000000a213f605b1008147--