From: Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu>
To: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Cc: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
dev@dpdk.org, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>,
Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] app/test: add support for skipping tests
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 11:02:07 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJvnSUChM0QJ0UCqo3RgkbUkMtEVvqhV914VFi7EMXxnq==1XQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJvnSUDFnQzeBpumqSuufZByvdj5uzkn1kb-i+LTX2QhhRwYNQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1508 bytes --]
On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 4:03 PM Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>
> Yes, backporting would be ideal from a CI perspective because without it
> we can't run arm64 testing on LTS tests. But I know there are other
> considerations which also have to be weighed.
>
> David also has a patch[1] which should resolve the underlying issue which
> introduces the failures on the unit test we want to skip. If that patch is
> accepted, and backported, fixing our original problem with unit testing on
> our arm testbeds, that's another solution, at least for this specific unit
> test issue.
>
> It would still be nice to have this feature in case we need it otherwise.
>
> [1]
> https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20230821085806.3062613-4-david.marchand@redhat.com/
>
> Hi. just to close the loops on this, yes David's aforementioned patch did
resolve the unit test failure which was preventing us from running
fast-tests on our arm64 test beds. But, it is not (yet, at least)
backported for LTS releases.
Even if it were, having Bruce's patch here backported would mean the CI
testing approach could be common across releases in situations where
testcases have to be skipped.
Anyways, whether it's possible or "worth it" is ultimately down to the
community's bandwidth, but I didn't want to let the conversation lapse
without an update, and raising what the benefits would be.
In any case, thanks again Bruce for the rework, it's a great addition.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2346 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-20 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-17 10:58 [RFC PATCH] " Bruce Richardson
2023-08-29 9:34 ` Thomas Monjalon
2023-08-29 13:27 ` Aaron Conole
2023-08-29 13:39 ` Bruce Richardson
2023-08-31 10:06 ` [PATCH v2] " Bruce Richardson
2023-08-31 10:18 ` [PATCH v3] " Bruce Richardson
2023-08-31 13:58 ` Bruce Richardson
2023-09-14 15:16 ` [PATCH v4] " Bruce Richardson
2023-09-25 16:26 ` Aaron Conole
2023-10-02 9:20 ` David Marchand
2023-10-03 20:22 ` Patrick Robb
2023-10-04 15:13 ` Aaron Conole
2023-10-09 20:03 ` Patrick Robb
2023-10-20 15:02 ` Patrick Robb [this message]
2023-10-20 15:08 ` Bruce Richardson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAJvnSUChM0QJ0UCqo3RgkbUkMtEVvqhV914VFi7EMXxnq==1XQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=probb@iol.unh.edu \
--cc=aconole@redhat.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ktraynor@redhat.com \
--cc=lylavoie@iol.unh.edu \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).