Re: Email based retests for the Loongarch lab

[Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1448 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 9:29 PM zhoumin <zhoumin@loongson.cn> wrote:

> Hi Patrick Robb,
> On 2025/7/25 10:24PM, Patrick Robb wrote:
>
>
>
>>
> The behavior you describe is correct - when the rebase argument is used,
> the patch should be applied to HEAD of the branch specified by the rebase
> arg.
>
> However, I do believe there is a discrepancy in our labs behavior when it
> comes to retests which are submitted without the rebase argument. In this
> case, UNH lab, AWS, and GitHub are running retests on the original patch
> artifacts without re-applying to the current HEAD at the time of the
> retest. On the other hand, I believe Loongson does re-apply to HEAD even
> when the rebase argument is not specified. I think in an ideal world our
> behavior would be uniform across the labs. What that would require in this
> case is either:
>
> 1. Loongson changes to retesting without re-apply on HEAD when no rebase
> argument is given (unclear how much work this is)
>
> I'm glad to say Loongson lab has changed to retesting without re-apply on
> HEAD when no rebase argument is given. We recorded the commit ID of the
> base for the series to test during the first test and use it as the base to
> retest if no rebase argument is specified. We also ensure that the patch
> will be applied to HEAD of the branch specified by the rebase argument if
> it exists.
>


Thanks that sounds perfect. :)

>
>>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3005 bytes --]