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 890A1A0A00 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:21:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E4B0140D60; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:21:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-ej1-f45.google.com (mail-ej1-f45.google.com [209.85.218.45]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54BD1140D34 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:21:17 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ej1-f45.google.com with SMTP id n26so24966627eju.6 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 06:21:17 -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=FXwzhzBEoyapsGMo96GhtSFTV4rWv9honr3AjXFCs/0=; b=aV+dDJ1EYVFF/und06UkraLVZYQxt/UXePTnQdiCj0QLMzeuuBbrt8s3diBLt/JI5P 9nbB9iAyKMuDEmxOPAJszzoyR2DYTycL0AD5bSJefuKR7DUEif19bixmjk2G1IeMJVYx f4jT8X+EkZqpdxOvnldrwBWd4Fv0hYQ3IK0dk= 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=FXwzhzBEoyapsGMo96GhtSFTV4rWv9honr3AjXFCs/0=; b=lRxBFz950nsSLaUqXOBxLmSvlvqkHpbpJ4cviWY9gvxRAVO1w5XiXbLxakKcI6Yf8z 3ZMBUttpSPKm4bEq0xvumSGxQ4M0jEsjAi2FQhHUzdI3IZ6w/cmu2IK7KlBrcNAR+zZR Zk0qWnFjXUnrDVSDMT1H8EYOL5TV1qawOvjjRPkXKI61JRuwQH9ktmKQD47HSy0URpDQ nszNXGQBFF7glg2keG9mLdeB5Vt7FZMSvnwWgNtlCQCs98URciemzWPT5mTf1acNcrq9 CU7KyQewdEUUha5ZnLD1trHoUiKZYjRaH8B2OqXfqIAccqfH0cCUt1HdIXx+s+wy6pZW 4zAw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530eutsyOnFovLt6dHIiV2Gom5dvL/dQWeY60UkG5GP2kZvJg7V/ GuaThrfRbG1nhv7IwbkTQy2bWI4nJtRZNuVgrTdMOg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzEoagKdsp8NeGxT/WtZUgfRySW455yFu4ByVLDzQxwdTv68GXaj3G8TBECIEN+YXWWmztv6DR+wJOgdErG9sc= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:5002:: with SMTP id s2mr10538521ejj.16.1610374877007; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 06:21:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Lincoln Lavoie Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 09:19:15 -0500 Message-ID: To: Jerin Jacob Cc: David Marchand , dpdklab , dev , ci@dpdk.org, Lukasz Wojciechowski , Aaron Conole , David Hunt Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007ff45d05b8a09edd" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-dev] distributor test failure in UNH CI on ARM 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 Sender: "ci" --0000000000007ff45d05b8a09edd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Jerin, There is a process for this defined. A maintainer should open a BUG for the CI lab, requesting specific tests or test cases be disabled, as it's a known failure being worked on. Once the test is disabled, the bug will be updated / assigned back to the maintainer, and should not be closed until the issue is fixed and the test can be re-enabled. This is so we don't lose track of anything. Cheers, Lincoln On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:05 AM Jerin Jacob wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 7:28 PM Lincoln Lavoie > wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> How do you want us to handle this in the lab? Can we pull / disable this >> unit test from the arm system, ignore it from now (if it's going to be >> fixed), disable the unit tests on arm for now (while it's being fixed)? >> > > > Maybe it is better to have a "known issue" based skip mechanism to address > this in CI. > > > >> >> Cheers, >> LIncoln >> >> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 8:54 AM Jerin Jacob >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 6:38 PM David Marchand >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hey guys, >>> > >>> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:14 AM David Marchand >>> > wrote: >>> > > UNH CI is raising failures on a ARM server for the distributor test: >>> > > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/15077/ >>> > > >>> > > Worker 59 handled 0 packets >>> > > Worker 60 handled 0 packets >>> > > Worker 61 handled 0 packets >>> > > Worker 62 handled 0 packets >>> > > Sanity test with non-zero hashes done >>> > > === testing big burst (burst) === >>> > > line 258: Missing packets, expected 783 >>> > > Test Failed >>> > > RTE>> >>> > > --- stderr --- >>> > >>> > Looking at the dashboard, I did not see a passing instance of this >>> > unit test for ARM. >>> > Did it ever work? >>> >>> No. There are a lot of sync barriers are missing in the distributor >>> library. >>> Since evendev is kind of replacing this library, we made the fix as >>> low priority. >>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > David Marchand >>> > >>> >> >> >> -- >> *Lincoln Lavoie* >> Senior Engineer, Broadband Technologies >> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824 >> lylavoie@iol.unh.edu >> https://www.iol.unh.edu >> +1-603-674-2755 (m) >> >> > -- *Lincoln Lavoie* Senior Engineer, Broadband Technologies 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824 lylavoie@iol.unh.edu https://www.iol.unh.edu +1-603-674-2755 (m) --0000000000007ff45d05b8a09edd Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi= =C2=A0Jerin,
There is a p= rocess for this defined.=C2=A0 A maintainer=C2=A0should open a BUG for the = CI lab, requesting specific tests or test cases be disabled, as it's a = known failure being worked=C2=A0on. Once the test is disabled, the bug will= be updated / assigned back to the maintainer, and should not be closed unt= il the issue is fixed and the test can be re-enabled.=C2=A0 This is so we d= on't lose track of anything.

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:05 AM Jerin Jacob= <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>= wrote:


On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 7:28 PM Lincoln Lavoi= e <lylavoie@io= l.unh.edu> wrote:
Hi All,

How do= you want us to handle this in the lab?=C2=A0 Can we pull / disable this un= it test from the arm system, ignore it from now (if it's going to be fi= xed), disable the unit tests on arm for now (while it's being fixed)?


Maybe it is bette= r to have=C2=A0a "known issue" based skip mechanism to address th= is in CI.

=C2=A0

<= /div>
Cheers,
LIncoln

On Mon, Jan 11,= 2021 at 8:54 AM Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 6:38 PM David= Marchand
<david.ma= rchand@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hey guys,
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:14 AM David Marchand
> <dav= id.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
> > UNH CI is raising failures on a ARM server for the distributor te= st:
> > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashbo= ard/patchsets/15077/
> >
> > Worker 59 handled 0 packets
> > Worker 60 handled 0 packets
> > Worker 61 handled 0 packets
> > Worker 62 handled 0 packets
> > Sanity test with non-zero hashes done
> > =3D=3D=3D testing big burst (burst) =3D=3D=3D
> > line 258: Missing packets, expected 783
> > Test Failed
> > RTE>>
> > --- stderr ---
>
> Looking at the dashboard, I did not see a passing instance of this
> unit test for ARM.
> Did it ever work?

No. There are a lot of sync barriers are missing in the distributor library= .
Since evendev is kind of replacing this library, we made the fix as
low priority.



>
>
>
> --
> David Marchand
>


--
Lincoln Lavoie
Senior Engineer, Broadband Tec= hnologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
lylavoie@iol.unh.ed= u
+1-603-674-2755 (m)



--
Lincoln Lavoie
Seni= or Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Dur= ham, NH 03824
+1-603-674-2755 = (m)

<= /div>
--0000000000007ff45d05b8a09edd--