On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 10:53:22AM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> Hello Patrick,
>
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 10:00 PM Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I want to report a possible regression from this patch series seen from CI testing on our Intel 82599ES 10G NIC, which we failed to report to patchwork when this initially went under CI due to a bug in our Jenkins reporting scripts. Use of the ixgbe driver appears to be affected. Tyler I apologize for the issues seen with reporting. We've made some temporary changes to avoid this happening again, and are currently reworking our reporting process entirely to provide greater reliability.
> >
> > Here is a DTS snippet showing the issue, and the full log for the failing virtio_smoke test can be downloaded here: https://dpdkdashboard.iol.unh.edu/results/dashboard/patchsets/26560/
> >
> > 06/06/2023 18:22:58                TestVirtioSmoke: Start send packets and verify
> > 06/06/2023 18:22:58                         tester: ifconfig enp134s0f0 mtu 9000
> > 06/06/2023 18:22:58                         tester:
> > 06/06/2023 18:42:59                TestVirtioSmoke: Test Case test_virtio_pvp Result FAILED: TIMEOUT on port start 0
> > 06/06/2023 18:42:59                TestVirtioSmoke: port start 0
> >
> > ixgbe_dev_wait_setup_link_complete(): IXGBE link thread not complete too long time!
> > ixgbe_dev_wait_setup_link_complete(): IXGBE link thread not complete too long time!
> > ixgbe_dev_wait_setup_link_complete(): IXGBE link thread not complete too long time!
> >
> > We initially took this Intel10G testing offline to investigate as we thought it was a lab infra failure. Obviously that wasn't the case, so ideally we will bring this back online when appropriate. But, I don't want to do so right now and start failing everyone's patchseries which are obviously unrelated to this. Comments on this are welcome, otherwise of course I will just return this test coverage to our CI when the state of the git tree allows for it.
> >
> > Apologies for the missing report and the timeline on this. We are taking action to deliver results more reliably going forward.
>
> (reduced the cc list a bit)
>
> This is probably the same issue than what was reported by Intel
> validation: https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1249
>

Thanks David

I should have read the next thread in the mail chain before replying.

> A fix has been merged in next-net-intel, it will reach the main repo soon.
> https://git.dpdk.org/next/dpdk-next-net-intel/commit/?id=fe4ce0aee766969a0e27fe28ced8ee7c761a2c4e

Patrick please let me know if after this integration I still need to
investigate further.

Thanks

>
>
> --
> David Marchand