From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA656A052F for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 21:28:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 615992B98; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 21:28:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-ed1-f51.google.com (mail-ed1-f51.google.com [209.85.208.51]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 935F42A6C for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 21:28:19 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ed1-f51.google.com with SMTP id v28so4668383edw.12 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:28:19 -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=e/WgE7F7iKc31zNtyXUKm5sJ218J6ObjDGPmlHog5NE=; b=b0S5H0zBWvvP9NC0jTf8eosCGvt1NlSVE5SqnTlw8cOLILWQwnMs9eEqPFrSJLK1hZ hFey1vFDI2wG1yBgqKv+3+xt73qk8zdGY+Yo/ieITQnUCFjk2IqEO4Q9BcRPuykkrLfe EANYWrmcBzvDj1bRNF9S942qu67w78qC4wUsE= 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=e/WgE7F7iKc31zNtyXUKm5sJ218J6ObjDGPmlHog5NE=; b=AjQEFxDK707u5xfrXii0k2ziRg+QTDvP9BKmpRX7e2XztbMTBZmqogRfnelEfdMvdo K0G+hI4s4tYE54tBbWMRaxcxN+Oq3blTor5n485BMtUTSixHQPmKyeIJ3cgSuAffNS0E xpl5mhZx62uU4kVgBmvB2JwIDTPYA9Kb5TajzTqtrwbDFwlqHmlcAV58OMrdGOGyiWr4 o2Y6NMSEM/g7/EmjrWQ2hKoC4wG6PjHe+a4hHYIwcBnE4qYFBPJSexA+EyibkGEQGck2 RykDd/fFWCqy675hnGpqPU3KwBzBg/nfQe/2/q6ZRlaPwY8KrTfeTNdBS/SG6xLpiyEk /34A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU2DPoQkN3r17/Bj+PVKce4UwrJMbnku5Lh5a07Qv5BwFx5j72d RYdWil3PUzqV0aUB1xzVeMlNF6xoShFRSoYs2CnNzA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyXkb9NSHniOfvB9B0KBKsN1Je81xPvEgmchXsw6RVbFt7vAkCUTAGv51B8b0xaYq2B4+fVh8Utfes9hHG/API= X-Received: by 2002:a50:d713:: with SMTP id t19mr8699853edi.367.1579811299126; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:28:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1827408.xz2uEaWSZ7@xps> In-Reply-To: From: Lincoln Lavoie Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:28:38 -0500 Message-ID: To: Jeremy Plsek Cc: Thomas Monjalon , ci@dpdk.org, "Tu, Lijuan" , "Chen, Zhaoyan" , "Xu, Qian Q" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004c12d7059cd47b98" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] Intel performance test is failing X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 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" --0000000000004c12d7059cd47b98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" In the "off cases," is that specific to that hardware, or does it happen on all hardware variants from time-to-time? On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 11:25 AM Jeremy Plsek wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 11:06 AM Thomas Monjalon > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > The test iol-intel-Performance is failing on all patches > > for a couple of days. > > It seems to be due to a perf drop with a 10G device > > > > Can we disable this test until we understand what happens? > > > > We need also to understand how to avoid such failure, > > and how to monitor and disable it faster. > > > > Thanks > > > > > Hi Thomas, > > I've disabled it for now until someone from the Intel team can look > into it (cc'd). > > I've also seem problems where the results are completely off > (-15mpps), and I've been rerunning those when they happen. I'm hoping > those can be resolved too. > > -- > Jeremy Plsek > UNH InterOperability Laboratory > -- *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) --0000000000004c12d7059cd47b98 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In = the "off cases," is that specific to that hardware, or does it ha= ppen on all hardware variants from time-to-time?

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020= at 11:25 AM Jeremy Plsek <jplsek@= iol.unh.edu> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 11:06 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> w= rote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The test iol-intel-Performance is failing on all patches
> for a couple of days.
> It seems to be due to a perf drop with a 10G device
>
> Can we disable this test until we understand what happens?
>
> We need also to understand how to avoid such failure,
> and how to monitor and disable it faster.
>
> Thanks
>
>
Hi Thomas,

I've disabled it for now until someone from the Intel team can look
into it (cc'd).

I've also seem problems where the results are completely off
(-15mpps), and I've been rerunning those when they happen. I'm hopi= ng
those can be resolved too.

--
Jeremy Plsek
UNH InterOperability Laboratory


--
Lincoln Lavoie
Senior Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 10= 0, Durham, NH 03824
+1-603-674= -2755 (m)
--0000000000004c12d7059cd47b98--