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 EDBD1A0547 for ; Wed, 19 May 2021 15:21:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBF9040041; Wed, 19 May 2021 15:21:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-ej1-f53.google.com (mail-ej1-f53.google.com [209.85.218.53]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5A534003F for ; Wed, 19 May 2021 15:21:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-ej1-f53.google.com with SMTP id lz27so19905785ejb.11 for ; Wed, 19 May 2021 06:21:25 -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=O6kyHIFkRFc+KX0ZesABcUDhhUIVYTASnBIS8eIH8S4=; b=JXhOtVgxJI7awVXot0Yn1MVjgwxCp+hGN2G8MLP42Dxy6+/h0bdm/TQQ71ykxHWy2o 9Kpfjlnm+bu4AXvwy1ocndrhQcwBMKqAI4GbzG5GTEjrUUziEM1ftdNaHyuWWdLSpz94 Fon1Va3UX9dLO7Gg3oBWcDI0NDRzZZmuwQ+cQ= 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=O6kyHIFkRFc+KX0ZesABcUDhhUIVYTASnBIS8eIH8S4=; b=Kpqk0XsZt0elQwEZcIw9jdbvrJeY+buJYhpfsgkGVl2kXkubbXaBm2Tj7hHRrhyz5S KssNYiYNN4jN6ajHQDjpWBTVScyOnKuTqsTF9MgJNVj4h/G1bZEKM9ebfS4X5unqsRVU Y4/s06SrceW8zj7Nebtr54plxhXe0jMnimJCqZqVUtlcCdoIxcODQWAExn1TeyYKOFLl s6pPWnnlJg4IPdU0qNBiIzbINjr3gJBk5GkFl2CeJSUzucFW1V6GwlAy3fk24zWpL+h1 mbEN1g7zev+VCgR8ZurHGa+dWTfnhaz7/0dssIYj1WMFtgG5pmrBW6QzHBvgoPv65sCI rwmw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533bwbGTZqi5dDn90nj+wU3Bd6/qCIwWaONWDtWomAYpJwnIgYJ5 gFRBGgHABDyuQAsxvdS5pypa8PsCT7paPuKTvRDE0w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwhbzPSCRK91fE/v1MXQjwMm6v16WDPQgGVdai2owxUZNwJsqOJ+ipWvRVxZYapTF3+VCMubGJxJL/0E3+OcWI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:3712:: with SMTP id d18mr12779612ejc.155.1621430485387; Wed, 19 May 2021 06:21:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1645051.GgosbX4935@thomas> In-Reply-To: From: Lincoln Lavoie Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 09:21:13 -0400 Message-ID: To: Aaron Conole Cc: Thomas Monjalon , ci@dpdk.org, dpdklab Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001c2be805c2aeb434" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] UNH CI failing 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" --0000000000001c2be805c2aeb434 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" As far as I can tell, it looks like one of the clocks fell out of sync on the container runners, which caused the builds to fail. Also, as far I can tell from an initial look, it impacted the two patches Thomas cited. Two patches that are running now (i.e. they don't have a full set of results yet, look like they are running on. So, it was a transient issue. Obviously we need to track down its root cause. I suspect something happened with NTP, which should be keeping the runners and bare metal systems synced. I'm looking into that now. For the patches with the failed jobs, we will queue those for rerun today. Cheers, Lincoln On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 9:05 AM Aaron Conole wrote: > Thomas Monjalon writes: > > > It seems the IOL CI is failing today: > > > > > https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/1621406749-15536-1-git-send-email-changpeng.liu@intel.com/ > > > https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20210519032745.707639-1-stevex.yang@intel.com/ > > > > That's especially embarassing for closing the release. > > I don't see any useful logs in the failures. > > What changed? > > -- *Lincoln Lavoie* Principal 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) --0000000000001c2be805c2aeb434 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
As = far as I can tell, it looks like one of the clocks fell out of sync on the = container runners, which caused the builds to fail.=C2=A0

Also, as far I can tell from an initial= =C2=A0look, it impacted the two patches Thomas cited.=C2=A0 Two patches tha= t are running now (i.e. they don't have a full set of results yet, look= like they are running on.=C2=A0 So, it was a transient issue.=C2=A0 Obviou= sly=C2=A0we need to track down its root cause. I suspect something=C2=A0hap= pened with NTP, which should be keeping the runners and bare metal systems = synced.=C2=A0 I'm looking into that now.

For the patches with the failed jobs, we will queue th= ose for rerun today.

Cheers,
Lincoln



On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 9:05 AM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net&g= t; writes:

> It seems the IOL CI is failing today:
>
> https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/1621406749-15536-1-git-s= end-email-changpeng.liu@intel.com/
> https= ://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20210519032745.707639-1-stevex.yang@= intel.com/
>
> That's especially embarassing for closing the release.

I don't see any useful logs in the failures.

What changed?



--
Lincoln Lavoie
Prin= cipal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, = Durham, NH 03824
+1-603-674-= 2755 (m)

--0000000000001c2be805c2aeb434--