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 55B19A058A; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 12:09:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7C871DFE7; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 12:09:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B1371DF98 for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 12:09:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E692B5C02C4; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 06:09:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 17 Apr 2020 06:09:54 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=UZyuWDPLFeCGh5+Oia7O2A6WKnkZrbGohPaDR909L4I=; b=lZvmgcI2UL49 BMfYeTFksP1/2nGlktFpeN0LJ16VVamkh4C5KHLdttG86rfAdzzROe0SvUJsFM9s 94aJDG7gV1jnUsQysX5YDlamnytPQA4ov4S2SwvSWGY/0gmb6wxVB65l6PMoGkZm AnzL5my6SAJuerYV1ULDnMi8NRP925c= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=UZyuWDPLFeCGh5+Oia7O2A6WKnkZrbGohPaDR909L 4I=; b=Ggus13Ehs8s2AaNOvR4rMRsS5CuGWBRq8hNtbHhPde43Bm/kcS07jRvC/ qos2EYgIUeikfH/TFhotNi6QqjPeDc9IseYEkhh3RvO2SslqjR8LQS5o2o9igV6Z XAEm/kpRJkR+3cwuXwNwXmDo1gF+5Or6cEyYWrm4rr70UQQld1RvYMDpXXl7hfrS HYBIcoMsM6L3vnrdYt5+dvNch0TDhS9UuSc+elWjOziqNycawEnuykuHe+//i/1v szUSUdxzRdWuaq2UaWry0pvGXImWuc2FhV8hYetsL95v/YJYJ6fAiCtB82Qa4cuD HIxajMUf6nhxd3bXzszlUofxiBkyQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrfeejgddvgecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucffoh hmrghinhepthhrrghvihhsqdgtihdrtghomhhmuhhnihhthidpthhrrghvihhsqdgtihdr tghomhenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdr nhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7482E3280069; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 06:09:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Aaron Conole , Ruifeng Wang Cc: David Marchand , dev , Gavin Hu , Honnappa Nagarahalli , Michael Santana , nd , honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 12:09:51 +0200 Message-ID: <3628048.OYXXYNVTWy@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20200416110053.2547791-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <4760008.eFTFzoEnKi@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 17/04/2020 10:49, Ruifeng Wang: > From: Thomas Monjalon > > 16/04/2020 15:45, Aaron Conole: > > > David Marchand writes: > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:44 PM Aaron Conole > > wrote: > > > >> Thomas Monjalon writes: > > > >> > > > >> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC: > > > >> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6 > > > >> > > > > >> > In order to get reliable Travis reports, the use of Arm machines > > > >> > is removed until Travis fixes it. > > > >> > > > > >> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon > > > >> > --- > > > >> > > > >> We should add back the cross-build if we do this - at least then we > > > >> could have a reliable compilation test of Arm64 code. Does it make > > > >> sense? > > > > > > > > I don't see them removed by this patch, the two jobs are still present ? > > > > > > Whoops - for some reason I missed them. Nevermind :) > > > > So? Acked? > > > Can we achieve this by allowing failures on AArch64 jobs? > https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/build-matrix/#rows-that-are-allowed-to-fail > > Add following setting: > jobs: > allow_failures: > - arch: arm64 > > So we can keep the jobs while not suffering from unstable infrastructure. > Results of these jobs will still observable. This gives us a chance to know when jobs are stable. I don't see the benefit. It will just make Travis reports unclear. I wait at least one more week to give Travis a chance to fix Arm support. Please work with them. If no result shortly, I will apply this patch to improve DPDK CI reliability.