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 E4216A0549 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 17:07:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC6024014E; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 17:07:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-il1-f179.google.com (mail-il1-f179.google.com [209.85.166.179]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BC8940147 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 17:07:46 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-il1-f179.google.com with SMTP id e1so16608892ilu.0 for ; Tue, 09 Feb 2021 08:07:46 -0800 (PST) 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=Mc3dPUSUVqiWTxFJCFSUd52V3EDMImuwiLi3OWG27ok=; b=ZMaO12mVKKduA+JlBYzTKznq7iR4eB36ygUQqkb2X3pZU0W9EdvfzJNUF/arY+MF5u b9CSWveBOCtbnIiIDr8TZ+2RClWB+ZU/X7dSxhwIffJx+/LLBvX/noiXq1bpFieTfkzL SBmSOIB0svdK/VFhtdKpQEMIYnhobfF5E/lsg= 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=Mc3dPUSUVqiWTxFJCFSUd52V3EDMImuwiLi3OWG27ok=; b=msRtj0mEX9yV5mSHlCI/noFIUratnYWxsotVhXz6C9LNtvAolg9UwpfZpqrVQGxjr2 8EF/RLKagFsHLGnCLSKC7SGj2KZvls0rTNpavuHnlfRN2BejZlXtmC3RmaiihrUSRRJU 9TdMYu0Fu9IkizwJc5QoqulvPDqUPJTjr5b2ceLiJFDZCDxB8V2D9iZv8PvBGW/AujoD cgoWSnIY8gYJTTwPBkVelAQhiZaHNc7KZVwlr/yZrcAJjwG1TIvtTtyf9o1o+MpyojCR ACJP/qS0IHHTKlSVtwFoGvfC4F5byBTOqkjLXW7Z8VHQLh7PxW5dLwVE6t7M63u7WBWU sEXA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5327N23g6yPWzgMFFdKvM6RYySxoHReHkdfRyRmTilFdFdC1Bt9s SBEcdr7hePXRKXDuLbObUZDJ2fiNvcbYMiIy068w1g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx4Slte+9ymIUCUnFIu6cRs6DLDohY4K7EAM/iNnnWvfjifgIpMIYqsehLGBKLqhxu3FIde5uxoY3jhWC7gaLM= X-Received: by 2002:a92:c26a:: with SMTP id h10mr13563272ild.234.1612886865447; Tue, 09 Feb 2021 08:07:45 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Brandon Lo Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 11:07:09 -0500 Message-ID: To: Aaron Conole Cc: "Zawadzki, Tomasz" , Lincoln Lavoie , "dpdklab@iol.unh.edu" , "ci@dpdk.org" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "spdk@lists.01.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK 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 everyone, I will adjust the branches and watch over the first few pipelines to make sure everything goes smoothly. Thanks for the update, Brandon On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:13 AM Aaron Conole wrote: > > "Zawadzki, Tomasz" writes: > > > Hi Lincoln, > > > > > > > > That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x. > > > > Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even from a few > hours ago). I suppose the lab side might need some adjustment, too? > > > > > The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if > > this is what you are seeing on your end too. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Tomek > > > > > > > > From: Lincoln Lavoie > > Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM > > To: Zawadzki, Tomasz > > Cc: Aaron Conole ; Brandon Lo ; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; > > dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab > > > > > > > > Thanks Tomek, > > > > > > > > Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make sure the next set of builds pass or see what the next failure > > is. :-P > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > Lincoln > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz wrote: > > > > Hi Aaron, > > > > Thank you for reporting this ! > > > > This is an issue with rte_power now depending on rte_ethdev, which was resolved on latest SPDK. > > > > I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK branch for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK > > release, would be v21.01.x: > > https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x > > > > The fix has been backported to that branch and should be merged shortly: > > https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320 > > > > Thanks, > > Tomek > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: dev On Behalf Of Aaron Conole > > > Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM > > > To: Brandon Lo > > > Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org > > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab > > > > > > Greetings, > > > > > > I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation in the UNH community lab seems > > > to be failing, and I don't see an obvious reason for the failure. > > > The logs haven't been too helpful - it appears that there is a symbol that isn't > > > available when linking. > > > > > > Job details (for example): > > > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/results/results- > > > uploads/test_runs/2363efb43157465db3228c34c00ebd57/log_upload_file/20 > > > 21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip > > > > > > Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the compilation of > > > SPDK? Maybe show the arguments to the compiler for the specific object? > > > Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -Aaron > -- Brandon Lo UNH InterOperability Laboratory 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824 blo@iol.unh.edu www.iol.unh.edu