Re: [PATCH v5] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data

[Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>]

Hi,

"Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> writes:

> Hi Huichao,
>
>  
>
> In general yes, it is developer responsibility to address any issues with his/her patches.

+1

> In that particular case, looking at the logs, it seems to be some misconfiguration
>
> on test-machine not related anyhow to your changes.
>
> BTW, there are few similar failures with other patches at about the same date:
>
> https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/21562/
>
> https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/21546/
>
> Which again, makes me think that  it is just a tesc-config related failure.
>
> What is the best way to deal with it?

Agreed.  I've CC'd UNH lab, but in this case I think these are the BRCM
managed systems.

> Probably the easiest and safest thing – to resubmit the patch to force
>
> another run of test harness.
>
> Aaron, is there any better way to deal with it?

At the moment, no.  We do have an effort for resubmits to be requested -
but that hasn't been completed yet.

> Thanks
>
> Konstantin
>
>  
>
>  
>
> From: Huichao Cai <chcchc88@163.com> 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2022 2:22 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re:RE: [PATCH v5] ip_frag: add IPv4 options fragment and test data
>
>  
>
> Hi Konstantin,
>
>  
>
> This patch has a test case failure:ci/iol-broadcom-Functional.
>
> Failed Tests:
>
>                - mtu_update
>
>                - scatter
>
> The same goes for many other patches,Do I need to deal with it, how to deal with it?
>
>  
>
> Huichao,Cai