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 646FFA0C3F for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 20:26:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C52A16241A; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 20:26:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-io1-f54.google.com (mail-io1-f54.google.com [209.85.166.54]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFAC0162410 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 20:26:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-io1-f54.google.com with SMTP id a11so23091033ioo.0 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:26:39 -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=j5dIvL6vL9a4d0euXE6htRmBFNTXsvp7sxlJiaOeEPw=; b=joo5uk7XCzzKdJLMEiAq4PtUcKWrHr1V9Txqi4cKTH8ipkwtEci8Qgg6UKipxyp2lt V5CmeoIytvj5dZI03Rclq1hHvcWYPsf1bcp4KkdqFQO0Xrztce6caC4OLP198hJgfNig zqOtcEOPfUrqadUuUKG2dL61+BTTDJGTgRbZE= 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=j5dIvL6vL9a4d0euXE6htRmBFNTXsvp7sxlJiaOeEPw=; b=F53UuX6NGKg09JdvKcWevqYv3HWZfz/RtODRJysIy7G/vQn27gkvcYGA82gYLKmnr7 u/gjtXKCq7pbv3x+Egx2W/C4s1wmdf/zd7+p/5sXdbc+E1F4XSZQ7k4WLsWDyr1DfRuS 71pQbhIjMc2D120d2nnHJPWgFQxhov5dGA+N4jRFfEoFX9TDUZHcKECE1amLrrvpGgmw AWzsBNLAbdNtCYpWAbXBGOgC9lTSEO69zV4MD7wCqKidE1bTTYNf4dliswOmhjSuit7V sBLA+21x1x20CPNKyt24EAEtYV7m8RgAu4k028vC+T5xmV5IhaCiyn7Sr18515lkqn0U 2oTg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532mmqeta+jPh6eRFXYkWnaX183fItCxDlXFFVb4b9/Q191Or5dC 9Qfya/IuuvZr16+t3uNRjWwzKxMhKEbZ0yoIl5VseonApGN9OA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxRiuhU5ERtwz/n988eJY5rsLs8OHVkhSIIqL8OV+0bPoS1nV/X+zg6YO4JR3ZbBwfCqSHApRsry0Cl9SIQmFc= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:8046:: with SMTP id b6mr457443ior.188.1618511199331; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <2891195.MathiC2lse@thomas> In-Reply-To: <2891195.MathiC2lse@thomas> From: Brandon Lo Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 14:26:03 -0400 Message-ID: To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: dpdklab , ci@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdklab] What is the reliability of the community lab 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" Hi Thomas, For the ABI check failure, we were working on a few migration-related changes that caused this issue. We have fixed the underlying cause and the rolling migration will be completed soon. The test will be rerun and reported back up to patchworks as well. We are also in the process of adding more monitoring for failure results that are not limited to only infrastructure failures, i.e. failures caused by a test's return value will alert us in a separate category which will allow us to validate the result. Thanks, Brandon On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:10 AM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > We still have some severe reliability issues with the community lab. > One under investigation, waiting for a bisect, is making the lab crashing. > > Another one I would like to understand is about the ABI check. > Why the test is failing (which is normal) in Travis and GitHub > but passing in the community lab? > > See this example: > https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/1618283653-16510-6-git-send-email-xuemingl@nvidia.com/ > > -- Brandon Lo UNH InterOperability Laboratory 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824 blo@iol.unh.edu www.iol.unh.edu