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 592FA48A9C; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 14:48:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33E0D40264; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 14:48:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 107284021F for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 14:48:50 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1762523330; 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=BodKZDRt3rh2wyJ1idQkGjponS0ZnLuGIon8AwrdQU0=; b=LbsJuVr98QCE8OLMH2q6OwE+ERdue10o+oi0XPdaLlsxsSUQRuCRIBbXXNPa9xoYfO5mQ6 t8N6yUOplfLGTg5LyL27Q/stdKzxmFLta0e0QUG/I2p1sO9fXpg8/Br+32sgT6oitP6Amg 2d1xT6M+XykKBQ5wlOmAwYtYbbfo2ag= Received: from mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-44-9FOZfdvLM5OXsdpnYgUAKA-1; Fri, 07 Nov 2025 08:48:47 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 9FOZfdvLM5OXsdpnYgUAKA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: 9FOZfdvLM5OXsdpnYgUAKA_1762523326 Received: from mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.111]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16869180047F; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 13:48:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from RHTRH0061144 (unknown [10.22.88.225]) by mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96F9518002A6; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 13:48:43 +0000 (UTC) From: Aaron Conole To: Patrick Robb Cc: "Puttaswamy, Rajesh T" , "Gao, DaxueX" , ci@dpdk.org, Luca Vizzarro Subject: Re: Intel doc built failure in DPDK CI testing In-Reply-To: (Patrick Robb's message of "Thu, 6 Nov 2025 14:50:37 -0500") References: Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2025 08:48:41 -0500 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.111 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: XrBQKjUlTK-hkzLRJGvSB1Ww7p9NZB5oz7T7LDDK24Q_1762523326 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain 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 Patrick Robb writes: > Hello, > > I recently submitted a patchseries to DPDK, which Intel DPDK Lab is reporting a build failure > for: > > failure email: https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2025-November/927503.html > series: https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=36596 NOTE that you'll need to respin the series anyway due to SPDX failure. BUT, I agree something might be amiss in the intel setup - the doc build in github actions passed: https://github.com/ovsrobot/dpdk/actions/runs/19119065633/job/54635284364 > failure: > > --------------- > > *Build Failed #1: > OS: UB2404-64 > Target: x86_64-native-linuxapp-doc > FAILED: doc/guides/html > /usr/bin/python3 ../buildtools/call-sphinx-build.py /usr/bin/sphinx-build 25.11.0-rc1 > /root/UB2404-64_K6.8.0_GCC13.3.0/x86_64-native-linuxapp-doc/36596/dpdk/doc/guides > /root/UB2404-64_K6.8.0_GCC13.3.0/x86_64-native-linuxapp-doc/36596/dpdk/x86_64-native-linuxapp-doc/doc/guides > -a -W > > Warning, treated as error: > /root/UB2404-64_K6.8.0_GCC13.3.0/x86_64-native-linuxapp-doc/36596/dpdk/doc/guides/tools/dts.rst:555:Include > file > '/root/UB2404-64_K6.8.0_GCC13.3.0/x86_64-native-linuxapp-doc/36596/dpdk/dts/test_run.example.yaml' > not found or reading it failed > [3674/3674] Generating doc/api/dts/dts_api_html with a custom command > ninja: build stopped > > -------------------- > > The above says the failure is caused because dpdk/dts/test_run.example.yaml is not found, > and it is referenced in line 555 of dts.rst. That makes sense, given that > dts/test_run.example.yaml is removed in my series, and moved into a new directory > (dts/configuration). So, now the path for this file is > dts/configuration/test_run.example.yaml. However, this should not be an issue for the > build, because dts.rest is updated in my patchseries to reflect the new configuration paths. > See: > https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20251105223628.1659390-3-probb@iol.unh.edu/ > > > diff: > > @@ -549,20 +576,20 @@ And they both have two network ports which are physically > connected to each othe > > .. _test_run_configuration_example: > > -``dts/test_run.example.yaml`` > -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > +``dts/configurations/test_run.example.yaml`` > +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > -.. literalinclude:: ../../../dts/test_run.example.yaml > +.. literalinclude:: ../../../dts/configurations/test_run.example.yaml > :language: yaml > :start-at: # Define > > > The diff above which is a part of my series should be ensuring that the reference to > dts/test_run.example.yaml is removed, but it is clearly still remaining in the DPDK artifact > you are using for your build for testing. Can you check this, and check whether my patch is > being properly applied before the doc build starts? Please let me know if I am making any > errors, I am happy to re-submit differently as needed! > > Thanks.