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 AA370468E0; Thu, 12 Jun 2025 14:47:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BBE140F16; Thu, 12 Jun 2025 14:47:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pj1-f50.google.com (mail-pj1-f50.google.com [209.85.216.50]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C96240ED4 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2025 14:47:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pj1-f50.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-306b6ae4fb2so874226a91.3 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2025 05:47:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; t=1749732467; x=1750337267; darn=dpdk.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=pfNqUZPwJPFJxRmA02sY9OEoGCJIewk/eNRHookhqWw=; b=F0aMqp4XpyR32LhWvYnhTZblW23eZQm78omXNTlUhkNyaLZXFSdZML5xT29TK8/taP CNKUtN5NRdqDLSMHOu7+oF/pCb2R/WuOIpOAHGZi0/StOWt98GYeDfyC1ue2w8XMiFqx t4BAq2TPJzis5hPHwa2xp8I/gh7J/hZ2mbPeU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1749732467; x=1750337267; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=pfNqUZPwJPFJxRmA02sY9OEoGCJIewk/eNRHookhqWw=; b=hS/TtVgdQYAwvvNJjxq1QPmx2AAk+c1A5nrpsL1AEiZqrU71swaudV0bQBC7EShxDc 4WgCSCimlW0vrhM4CGyskzm/uOL5dzjeeUNOgZ+z5RBJdXrVSNZSczggvCWOtlNohzOm DqO2Kz8RC53YIwPaMJMaPdkJbEYW/8P+1gtQu+hysYBhu+xalJhxJi1tb27Zu0Q1eYPu ALW6LbiPCjAe1deEJPdqG/SzpfjUiuIVzmUrciYy8fLfbVIiQwvxoyFjMDAd9Idcp7Ly M2lu9Fhx/4AuQkoaYyenZ+xyKvIFAfi7LAbC4ZFcgUF1VAZQfqhXjwK4TUhYT6TFdI8r PqZw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUHYcdH47JzruzFDxZApnsjjCeoUKFz/jrZsRlAx3QD4REqB2/g17qyF+1yEtRfGbZ+Ow==@dpdk.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxHhlxSYxLtMPljNsY3mc3giy0IAVo8YAGJd8nNz0+JJFVpz+2z Gu+g9F3vjLrmBx9+zah926JVxcM4TG+4S0n9A1hlZ+Fg9iaNAGlX6izXmR0WCfbOCMvbTB/yzh7 TXO8EwLYLtXi9MDHnFZnbegboRl6g/0iP965c4HfF5Q== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuOmopJNd8CWzK3UWe8gzixlM7/d4EyIAn1qvwKG/j8fXUN85hwy0DImmWkEw8 T4WNDXZe30e0ispDa87896ApbUf6YsEjwDOjXvZT5nqLJUqR6SvyF+LS6dfcXaRklxt+pBOpUi4 Mzj5Ej3A0+8BZriLM6XZcQMbxy75DBkvwVtR75aEkGJB2H2MYQ+/NGr8b9tQiX4xcDa9m56rI+v Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE1YEG3TOXm/ofQq2CGkscrU9WrjSiZU/UZ8iN04l8HKJ4bSFHbpQC8ZDQDxpLuxv1vU3LB5AAf9YKF4qLEC0w= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:53cc:b0:311:ea13:2e63 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-313c069cd98mr4448395a91.13.1749732466608; Thu, 12 Jun 2025 05:47:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <37fcfcd5c17f4fcbb212ffd6f2b20451@amazon.com> In-Reply-To: From: Patrick Robb Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 08:42:35 -0400 X-Gm-Features: AX0GCFv3GuzI_0IHt0EVAVEEJIZ82-7muSxx9yub4S_Ijy7ltlce6wia7HfOp7Y Message-ID: Subject: Re: AWS lab meson test fails To: "Brandes, Shai" Cc: Bruce Richardson , "ci@dpdk.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001fe05106375f564e" X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org --0000000000001fe05106375f564e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Oh, and of course I'll just raise that if the apply failure comes from pw_maintainers_cli.py having guessed the wrong tree, the submitter can always request a rebase and retest on a particular branch (which they can specify) using the testing recheck framework: https://core.dpdk.org/testing/#requesting-a-patch-retest On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 8:38=E2=80=AFAM Patrick Robb wr= ote: > Hi Shai, > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 6:20=E2=80=AFAM Brandes, Shai wrote: > >> Hi Patrick, >> >> The failure status appears to be due to an issue applying the patch to >> the release notes RTS file. >> We suspect that the patch may have been applied to the incorrect DPDK >> tree. >> Could you advise if there is any specific metadata we should be using to >> determine the correct tree for applying the patch? >> > > Here is the script which should be used to determine the tree to apply th= e > patchseries to: > https://git.dpdk.org/tools/dpdk-ci/tree/tools/pw_maintainers_cli.py > > Even better than using that directly, though, is using this create series > artifact script, which will handle running pw_maintainers_cli.py and > applying the series from patchwork for you: > https://git.dpdk.org/tools/dpdk-ci/tree/tools/create_series_artifact.py > > The process create_series_artifact.py uses is: > > 1. Try to apply to the tree suggested by pw_maintainers_cli.py. If > successful, proceed. > 2. If there was an apply failure in 1, try to apply again, this time on > main. If successful, proceed. > 3. If 1 and 2 failed, indicate that there was an apply failure. > > Also, if your automation failed to apply the patch, the best thing is to > report "_apply patch failure_" in your test_report email, and bail out of > running testing (so don't run meson test in this case). > > And then as a separate matter, I see you mentioned the same sort of .rst > apply failure situation was seen on a patch you submitted recently. We do > not currently have a strategy for mitigating this, but perhaps we should > develop one. Do you have any ideas? I can also raise this discussion duri= ng > the CI meeting. > > Thanks Shai. > --0000000000001fe05106375f564e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Oh, and of course I'll just raise that if the=C2=A0app= ly failure comes from pw_maintainers_cli.py having guessed the wrong tree, = the submitter can always request a rebase and retest on a particular branch= (which they can specify) using the testing recheck framework:=C2=A0https://core.= dpdk.org/testing/#requesting-a-patch-retest

On= Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 8:38=E2=80=AFAM Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
Hi Shai= ,

On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 6:20=E2=80=AFAM Brandes, Shai <shaibran@amazon.com> wr= ote:
Hi Patrick,=

The failure status appears to be due to an issue applying the patch to the = release notes RTS file.
We suspect that the patch may have been applied to the incorrect DPDK tree.=
Could you advise if there is any specific metadata we should be using to de= termine the correct tree for applying the patch?

<= /div>
Here is the script which should be used to determine the tree to = apply the patchseries to:=C2=A0https://git.dpdk.org/= tools/dpdk-ci/tree/tools/pw_maintainers_cli.py

Even better than using that directly, though, is using this create series = artifact script, which will handle running pw_maintainers_cli.py and applyi= ng the series from patchwork for you:=C2=A0https= ://git.dpdk.org/tools/dpdk-ci/tree/tools/create_series_artifact.py

The process create_series_artifact.py uses is:

1. Try to apply to the tree suggested by pw_maintainers_c= li.py. If successful, proceed.
2. If there was an apply failure i= n 1, try to apply again, this time on main. If successful, proceed.
3. If 1 and 2 failed, indicate that there was an apply failure.

Also, if your automation failed to apply the patch, the be= st thing is to report "_apply patch failure_" in your test_report= email, and bail out of running testing (so don't run meson test in thi= s case).
=C2=A0
And then as a separate matter, I see yo= u mentioned the same sort of .rst apply failure situation was seen on a pat= ch you submitted recently. We do not currently have a strategy for mitigati= ng this, but perhaps we should develop one. Do you have any ideas? I can al= so raise this discussion during the CI meeting.

Th= anks Shai.
--0000000000001fe05106375f564e--