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 0689EA054D; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:25:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE9101CC5B8; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:25:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-il1-f173.google.com (mail-il1-f173.google.com [209.85.166.173]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76FCC1CC59B for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:25:48 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-il1-f173.google.com with SMTP id q9so5593076ilo.1 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 08:25:48 -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=LdyEr6Jd9GbrnP2+ImnEGgYkFYetdHrOrqwrrCrkFF8=; b=WnPZeDdqi0Q5BvVnMabF6bOgPEeH0bnY+a3Wee+jKKAKLaaqiRvd7YeVvCOSfzxZmG fQwi1qUZ7C4nTdWHiKe62YDXxEw+5YaYEMholzqVEApqZM6aLFQyUxXMHK/OqNNy69Cv 2YPd5jWZIp2djAZthAZi5P9eN4IciCWROlpZs= 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=LdyEr6Jd9GbrnP2+ImnEGgYkFYetdHrOrqwrrCrkFF8=; b=lM4hSk0OqzF6M7nF0L6oGOwa8Ty4yw+1IH1iqaKLKKt4pOHjIWvVBQU+w8bYOWkXC2 tUlTvQbL1GT2tIrZP9CPbiNebG1p7NYQCMSbB+p2pX2zLICV0mRrZ7Ky1h+HTIkQYBoy cBKl5fI50LRgzXKVIVga+xTDEc7kFTvx3HYF93qcYPQooFVR1ErLvnQgdR4Lwu0ytklT tqJ5w67y/Xh+vqUAxJihFyg675csCUDODL+Rhsy6dwgZ9cHPFj7JHLsA3Dtc3C2RcsjR XTPtkUlvBWoTaDPNVKyF1/JBN99st3w6EmhYZrSyqkvHkHUIL7EDQmPathiwMmwO1ee4 YE3Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533zzBkNnq34tZ9tIgp1KClE8xdNq5oQoTzdy5p5N2AWjaItLQMv WMwN2sfLDQPAJYZkLAfdXyhYXOf4noJO3oy4uDDvPA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzLCYJlkFq+BQX7RN+igonZLbg2d7iVsD4WS2CFRYcLM8a51cZii/bACVQiRVtKIaYFy6qr2IkhQQNOiH2jFcM= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1a68:: with SMTP id w8mr6411117ilv.147.1613060747784; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 08:25:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Brandon Lo Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 11:25:11 -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" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-ci] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab 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 Sender: "dev" Hi Aaron, I have disabled the pipeline. Here is the bug ticket so that we can keep track of the status: https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=637 Attached is the dockerfile and the script that it uses to run SPDK compilation. Thanks, Brandon On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 9:02 AM Aaron Conole wrote: > > Brandon Lo writes: > > > Hi again everyone, > > > > I have checked the pipelines with SPDK branch v21.01.x on the main DPDK branch. > > It still seems to have an issue with compilation, and I have attached > > a log of a Fedora SPDK compilation. > > There are some undefined references to "rte_ether_unformat_addr" > > I will continue to look into this. If you have any ideas on how to fix > > this, please let me know. > > Looks like rte_ethdev depends on rte_net - maybe I missed something. > > Brandon, can we disable this test for the time being since it's been > failing for a while now? Can you also send me the container image / > definitions you're using so that I can help work on this? > > > Thanks, > > Brandon > > > > On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:07 AM Brandon Lo wrote: > >> > >> 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 > -- Brandon Lo UNH InterOperability Laboratory 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824 blo@iol.unh.edu www.iol.unh.edu