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 6BCBF42D26; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 19:41:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AD7340DDA; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 19:41:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E35A1406BA; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 19:41:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D1965C00C8; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 13:41:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 22 Jun 2023 13:41:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t= 1687455687; x=1687542087; bh=w8quY6BwfCIiKMNtFTKzlPDB40Xed7hvKI5 xUHkeLQc=; b=ZkmunmVWVf3cDJcWWfXvCAjpGv0mnU/t78kDE39fwFqrKWjHFIt kZuJV1HgwNrRadNIBXjrWSp+yfGWONLj+SFZjQF0lXPVywKtCyfmhvorqlJlZCsm pMnDs9CXYlBA1f+94yizCinWhGDH+wyPV5QJBoYy6HK/3NyLPU7JFM0vetxoQtc4 rqSCvKUOPfMEJ/NAAChTBm2vPbtKIWN2eQDuLKtCeI/zydtMwAwJxriEog8r/e9N 9T4AyLSXl1V1QMHK8ueivjSK38RRZPPvNw2QyGWBnx7XKD1AX/zj9jFKaWuugEyz e5Xq1qogikY0Fd28M0AwqFkxwebhrVfIhkQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1687455687; x=1687542087; bh=w8quY6BwfCIiKMNtFTKzlPDB40Xed7hvKI5 xUHkeLQc=; b=C/xpePtby1JJiENM8SBeDySZDr06ni9iTIL0jJ4mZJEPnWnTJNa 6Zb+mn1T+oRc//GIllt3p5XAdoduvrVBQGA7AZqjVEZ0yaMBTMZNGcm2IMJKIV9+ nvVUB1NS1t/X7QtmuMAHSf07iwl5s7euhk3sq50WFb/ySxxLRx5Z4L5xAGHRkn6H m0RAH7eaL8tJJqPndnjYNCEg8R8rRS2rir1H01DsFXnwP/xFeodfDBQnjA4uwkxb /gXBZek08AcRYhns8/x0f5JwFGVoobF0ciFFgy4eZM0zHHQ/HTgT2h0RilxXuPZz t2s/5t0QwQRkPeRUVIRLfgE+aDOGjzq7qAA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrgeeguddgudduhecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhho mhgrshcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqne cuggftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdejieeifeehtdffgfdvleetueeffeehueejgfeuteeftddt ieekgfekudehtdfgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilh hfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 13:41:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: David Marchand Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org, Michael Santana , Aaron Conole Subject: Re: [PATCH] ci: fix libabigail cache in GHA Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 19:41:25 +0200 Message-ID: <4465869.8F6SAcFxjW@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20230620132955.46852-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 20/06/2023 16:21, Aaron Conole: > David Marchand writes: > > > In repositories where multiple branches run the ABI checks using > > different versions of libabigail (for example, a 22.11 branch using > > libabigail-1.8 and a main branch using libabigail-2.1), a collision > > happens on the libabigail binary cache entry. > > As a single cache entry is used, the content of the cache (let's say the > > cache was built for libabigail 2.1) won't match what the branch wants to > > use (in this example running the check for 22.11 branch requires > > libabigail 1.8). > > .ci/linux-build.sh then tries to recompile libabigail but it fails as > > the packages used for building libabigail are missing. > > > > Add the version to the cache entry name to avoid this collision. > > > > Fixes: 443267090edc ("ci: enable v21 ABI checks") > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > Signed-off-by: David Marchand > > Acked-by: Aaron Conole Applied, thanks.