DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
@ 2020-04-16 11:00 Thomas Monjalon
  2020-04-16 12:44 ` Aaron Conole
  2021-03-25 15:46 ` Thomas Monjalon
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2020-04-16 11:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev
  Cc: aconole, david.marchand, ruifeng.wang, gavin.hu,
	honnappa.nagarahalli, Michael Santana

Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6

In order to get reliable Travis reports,
the use of Arm machines is removed until Travis fixes it.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
---
 .travis.yml | 30 ------------------------------
 1 file changed, 30 deletions(-)

diff --git a/.travis.yml b/.travis.yml
index 2d2292ff64..b681aaccc4 100644
--- a/.travis.yml
+++ b/.travis.yml
@@ -101,33 +101,3 @@ jobs:
       apt:
         packages:
           - *aarch64_packages
-  # aarch64 gcc jobs
-  - env: DEF_LIB="static"
-    arch: arm64
-    compiler: gcc
-  - env: DEF_LIB="shared" RUN_TESTS=1
-    arch: arm64
-    compiler: gcc
-  - env: DEF_LIB="shared" BUILD_DOCS=1
-    arch: arm64
-    compiler: gcc
-    addons:
-      apt:
-        packages:
-          - *required_packages
-          - *doc_packages
-  - env: DEF_LIB="shared" ABI_CHECKS=1
-    arch: arm64
-    compiler: gcc
-    addons:
-      apt:
-        packages:
-          - *required_packages
-          - *libabigail_build_packages
-  # aarch64 clang jobs
-  - env: DEF_LIB="static"
-    arch: arm64
-    compiler: clang
-  - env: DEF_LIB="shared" RUN_TESTS=1
-    arch: arm64
-    compiler: clang
-- 
2.26.0


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-16 11:00 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs Thomas Monjalon
@ 2020-04-16 12:44 ` Aaron Conole
  2020-04-16 13:30   ` Jerin Jacob
  2020-04-16 13:43   ` David Marchand
  2021-03-25 15:46 ` Thomas Monjalon
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Conole @ 2020-04-16 12:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon
  Cc: dev, david.marchand, ruifeng.wang, gavin.hu,
	honnappa.nagarahalli, Michael Santana

Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:

> Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
> https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
>
> In order to get reliable Travis reports,
> the use of Arm machines is removed until Travis fixes it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> ---

We should add back the cross-build if we do this - at least then we
could have a reliable compilation test of Arm64 code.   Does it make
sense?


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-16 12:44 ` Aaron Conole
@ 2020-04-16 13:30   ` Jerin Jacob
  2020-04-16 13:43   ` David Marchand
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Jerin Jacob @ 2020-04-16 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aaron Conole
  Cc: Thomas Monjalon, dpdk-dev, David Marchand,
	Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China),
	Gavin Hu, Honnappa Nagarahalli, Michael Santana

On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:14 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
>
> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
> >
> > In order to get reliable Travis reports,
> > the use of Arm machines is removed until Travis fixes it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > ---
>
> We should add back the cross-build if we do this - at least then we
> could have a reliable compilation test of Arm64 code.   Does it make
> sense?

+1

>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-16 12:44 ` Aaron Conole
  2020-04-16 13:30   ` Jerin Jacob
@ 2020-04-16 13:43   ` David Marchand
  2020-04-16 13:45     ` Aaron Conole
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: David Marchand @ 2020-04-16 13:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aaron Conole
  Cc: Thomas Monjalon, dev, Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China),
	Gavin Hu, Honnappa Nagarahalli, Michael Santana

On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:44 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
>
> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
> >
> > In order to get reliable Travis reports,
> > the use of Arm machines is removed until Travis fixes it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > ---
>
> We should add back the cross-build if we do this - at least then we
> could have a reliable compilation test of Arm64 code.   Does it make
> sense?

I don't see them removed by this patch, the two jobs are still present ?

  # x86_64 cross-compiling aarch64 jobs
  - env: DEF_LIB="static" AARCH64=1
    arch: amd64
    compiler: gcc
    addons:
      apt:
        packages:
          - *aarch64_packages
  - env: DEF_LIB="shared" AARCH64=1
    arch: amd64
    compiler: gcc
    addons:
      apt:
        packages:
          - *aarch64_packages


-- 
David Marchand


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-16 13:43   ` David Marchand
@ 2020-04-16 13:45     ` Aaron Conole
  2020-04-16 14:39       ` Thomas Monjalon
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Conole @ 2020-04-16 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Marchand
  Cc: Thomas Monjalon, dev, Ruifeng Wang \(Arm Technology China\),
	Gavin Hu, Honnappa Nagarahalli, Michael Santana

David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> writes:

> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:44 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
>>
>> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
>> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
>> >
>> > In order to get reliable Travis reports,
>> > the use of Arm machines is removed until Travis fixes it.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>> > ---
>>
>> We should add back the cross-build if we do this - at least then we
>> could have a reliable compilation test of Arm64 code.   Does it make
>> sense?
>
> I don't see them removed by this patch, the two jobs are still present ?

Whoops - for some reason I missed them.  Nevermind :)

>   # x86_64 cross-compiling aarch64 jobs
>   - env: DEF_LIB="static" AARCH64=1
>     arch: amd64
>     compiler: gcc
>     addons:
>       apt:
>         packages:
>           - *aarch64_packages
>   - env: DEF_LIB="shared" AARCH64=1
>     arch: amd64
>     compiler: gcc
>     addons:
>       apt:
>         packages:
>           - *aarch64_packages


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-16 13:45     ` Aaron Conole
@ 2020-04-16 14:39       ` Thomas Monjalon
  2020-04-16 15:55         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
                           ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2020-04-16 14:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aaron Conole
  Cc: David Marchand, dev, Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China),
	Gavin Hu, Honnappa Nagarahalli, Michael Santana

16/04/2020 15:45, Aaron Conole:
> David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> writes:
> > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:44 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
> >>
> >> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
> >> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
> >> >
> >> > In order to get reliable Travis reports,
> >> > the use of Arm machines is removed until Travis fixes it.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> >> > ---
> >>
> >> We should add back the cross-build if we do this - at least then we
> >> could have a reliable compilation test of Arm64 code.   Does it make
> >> sense?
> >
> > I don't see them removed by this patch, the two jobs are still present ?
> 
> Whoops - for some reason I missed them.  Nevermind :)

So? Acked?





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-16 14:39       ` Thomas Monjalon
@ 2020-04-16 15:55         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
  2020-04-16 17:08           ` Aaron Conole
  2020-04-19  8:01           ` David Marchand
  2020-04-16 17:07         ` Aaron Conole
  2020-04-17  8:49         ` Ruifeng Wang
  2 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Honnappa Nagarahalli @ 2020-04-16 15:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: thomas, Aaron Conole
  Cc: David Marchand, dev, Ruifeng Wang, Gavin Hu, Michael Santana, nd,
	Honnappa Nagarahalli, nd

<snip>

> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
> 
> 16/04/2020 15:45, Aaron Conole:
> > David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> writes:
> > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:44 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > >> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
> > >>
> > >> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
> > >> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
Thanks David for creating the ticket. Will escalate this through our contacts at Travis CI, hopefully it can be resolved soon.

> > >> >
> > >> > In order to get reliable Travis reports, the use of Arm machines
> > >> > is removed until Travis fixes it.
> > >> >
> > >> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > >> > ---
> > >>
> > >> We should add back the cross-build if we do this - at least then we
> > >> could have a reliable compilation test of Arm64 code.   Does it make
> > >> sense?
> > >
> > > I don't see them removed by this patch, the two jobs are still present ?
> >
> > Whoops - for some reason I missed them.  Nevermind :)
> 
> So? Acked?
> 
> 
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-16 14:39       ` Thomas Monjalon
  2020-04-16 15:55         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
@ 2020-04-16 17:07         ` Aaron Conole
  2020-04-17  8:49         ` Ruifeng Wang
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Conole @ 2020-04-16 17:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon
  Cc: David Marchand, dev, Ruifeng Wang \(Arm Technology China\),
	Gavin Hu, Honnappa Nagarahalli, Michael Santana

Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:

> 16/04/2020 15:45, Aaron Conole:
>> David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> writes:
>> > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:44 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
>> >> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
>> >> >
>> >> > In order to get reliable Travis reports,
>> >> > the use of Arm machines is removed until Travis fixes it.
>> >> >
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>> >> > ---
>> >>
>> >> We should add back the cross-build if we do this - at least then we
>> >> could have a reliable compilation test of Arm64 code.   Does it make
>> >> sense?
>> >
>> > I don't see them removed by this patch, the two jobs are still present ?
>> 
>> Whoops - for some reason I missed them.  Nevermind :)
>
> So? Acked?

Yes,

Acked-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-16 15:55         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
@ 2020-04-16 17:08           ` Aaron Conole
  2020-04-19  8:01           ` David Marchand
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Conole @ 2020-04-16 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Honnappa Nagarahalli
  Cc: thomas\,
	David Marchand, dev, Ruifeng Wang, Gavin Hu, Michael Santana, nd

Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com> writes:

> <snip>
>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
>> 
>> 16/04/2020 15:45, Aaron Conole:
>> > David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> writes:
>> > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:44 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
>> > >>
>> > >> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
>> > >> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
> Thanks David for creating the ticket. Will escalate this through our
> contacts at Travis CI, hopefully it can be resolved soon.

I did get an email from someone at travis support acknowledging the
issue and saying that they are working on it.

>> > >> >
>> > >> > In order to get reliable Travis reports, the use of Arm machines
>> > >> > is removed until Travis fixes it.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>> > >> > ---
>> > >>
>> > >> We should add back the cross-build if we do this - at least then we
>> > >> could have a reliable compilation test of Arm64 code.   Does it make
>> > >> sense?
>> > >
>> > > I don't see them removed by this patch, the two jobs are still present ?
>> >
>> > Whoops - for some reason I missed them.  Nevermind :)
>> 
>> So? Acked?
>> 
>> 
>> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-16 14:39       ` Thomas Monjalon
  2020-04-16 15:55         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
  2020-04-16 17:07         ` Aaron Conole
@ 2020-04-17  8:49         ` Ruifeng Wang
  2020-04-17 10:09           ` Thomas Monjalon
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Ruifeng Wang @ 2020-04-17  8:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: thomas, Aaron Conole
  Cc: David Marchand, dev, Gavin Hu, Honnappa Nagarahalli, Michael Santana, nd


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2020 10:40 PM
> To: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> Cc: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>; dev <dev@dpdk.org>;
> Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>; Gavin Hu <Gavin.Hu@arm.com>;
> Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>; Michael Santana
> <maicolgabriel@hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
> 
> 16/04/2020 15:45, Aaron Conole:
> > David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> writes:
> > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:44 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > >> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
> > >>
> > >> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
> > >> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
> > >> >
> > >> > In order to get reliable Travis reports, the use of Arm machines
> > >> > is removed until Travis fixes it.
> > >> >
> > >> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > >> > ---
> > >>
> > >> We should add back the cross-build if we do this - at least then we
> > >> could have a reliable compilation test of Arm64 code.   Does it make
> > >> sense?
> > >
> > > I don't see them removed by this patch, the two jobs are still present ?
> >
> > Whoops - for some reason I missed them.  Nevermind :)
> 
> So? Acked?
> 
Can we achieve this by allowing failures on AArch64 jobs?
https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/build-matrix/#rows-that-are-allowed-to-fail

Add following setting:
jobs:
  allow_failures:
  - arch: arm64

So we can keep the jobs while not suffering from unstable infrastructure.
Results of these jobs will still observable. This gives us a chance to know when jobs are stable.

Thanks.
/Ruifeng
> 
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-17  8:49         ` Ruifeng Wang
@ 2020-04-17 10:09           ` Thomas Monjalon
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2020-04-17 10:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aaron Conole, Ruifeng Wang
  Cc: David Marchand, dev, Gavin Hu, Honnappa Nagarahalli,
	Michael Santana, nd, honnappa.nagarahalli

17/04/2020 10:49, Ruifeng Wang:
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > 16/04/2020 15:45, Aaron Conole:
> > > David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> writes:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:44 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
> > > >> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
> > > >> >
> > > >> > In order to get reliable Travis reports, the use of Arm machines
> > > >> > is removed until Travis fixes it.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > > >> > ---
> > > >>
> > > >> We should add back the cross-build if we do this - at least then we
> > > >> could have a reliable compilation test of Arm64 code.   Does it make
> > > >> sense?
> > > >
> > > > I don't see them removed by this patch, the two jobs are still present ?
> > >
> > > Whoops - for some reason I missed them.  Nevermind :)
> > 
> > So? Acked?
> > 
> Can we achieve this by allowing failures on AArch64 jobs?
> https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/build-matrix/#rows-that-are-allowed-to-fail
> 
> Add following setting:
> jobs:
>   allow_failures:
>   - arch: arm64
> 
> So we can keep the jobs while not suffering from unstable infrastructure.
> Results of these jobs will still observable. This gives us a chance to know when jobs are stable.

I don't see the benefit. It will just make Travis reports unclear.

I wait at least one more week to give Travis a chance to fix Arm support.
Please work with them.
If no result shortly, I will apply this patch to improve DPDK CI reliability.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-16 15:55         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
  2020-04-16 17:08           ` Aaron Conole
@ 2020-04-19  8:01           ` David Marchand
  2020-04-20 15:35             ` Ruifeng Wang
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: David Marchand @ 2020-04-19  8:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Honnappa Nagarahalli, Ruifeng Wang
  Cc: thomas, Aaron Conole, dev, Gavin Hu, Michael Santana, nd

Honnappa, Ruifeng,

On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 5:55 PM Honnappa Nagarahalli
<Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
> >
> > 16/04/2020 15:45, Aaron Conole:
> > > David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> writes:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:44 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
> > > >> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
> Thanks David for creating the ticket. Will escalate this through our contacts at Travis CI, hopefully it can be resolved soon.

There were failures that were obviously because of Travis, like this
quota exceeded error.
But we have other failures on the unit tests that I reported earlier
that are not clear: it might be because of Travis or running in
containers.

Example on last master build:
https://travis-ci.com/github/DPDK/dpdk/builds/160799081

- cycles_autotest failing:
https://travis-ci.com/github/DPDK/dpdk/jobs/320630402#L3460
- some random test ending up in timeout, this time table_autotest, I
also saw eal_fs_autotest:
https://travis-ci.com/github/DPDK/dpdk/jobs/320630406#L7140


-- 
David Marchand


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-19  8:01           ` David Marchand
@ 2020-04-20 15:35             ` Ruifeng Wang
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Ruifeng Wang @ 2020-04-20 15:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Marchand, Honnappa Nagarahalli
  Cc: thomas, Aaron Conole, dev, Gavin Hu, Michael Santana, nd, nd


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2020 4:01 PM
> To: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>; Ruifeng Wang
> <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>
> Cc: thomas@monjalon.net; Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; dev
> <dev@dpdk.org>; Gavin Hu <Gavin.Hu@arm.com>; Michael Santana
> <maicolgabriel@hotmail.com>; nd <nd@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
> 
> Honnappa, Ruifeng,
> 
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 5:55 PM Honnappa Nagarahalli
> <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
> > >
> > > 16/04/2020 15:45, Aaron Conole:
> > > > David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> writes:
> > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:44 PM Aaron Conole
> > > > > <aconole@redhat.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
> > > > >> > https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/76
> > > > >> > 19/6
> > Thanks David for creating the ticket. Will escalate this through our contacts
> at Travis CI, hopefully it can be resolved soon.
> 
> There were failures that were obviously because of Travis, like this quota
> exceeded error.
> But we have other failures on the unit tests that I reported earlier that are
> not clear: it might be because of Travis or running in containers.
> 
Yes. Unit test failures are observed more frequently recently in robot's results.

> Example on last master build:
> https://travis-ci.com/github/DPDK/dpdk/builds/160799081
> 
> - cycles_autotest failing:
> https://travis-ci.com/github/DPDK/dpdk/jobs/320630402#L3460
> - some random test ending up in timeout, this time table_autotest, I also saw
> eal_fs_autotest:
> https://travis-ci.com/github/DPDK/dpdk/jobs/320630406#L7140
> 
My ideas here:
1. Modify the test cases to relax criteria for AArch64.
2. Pick test cases to run for AArch64 on Travis.

Option 2 should be better. It only adapts for CI platform and doesn't change code.

/Ruifeng
> 
> --
> David Marchand


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2020-04-16 11:00 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs Thomas Monjalon
  2020-04-16 12:44 ` Aaron Conole
@ 2021-03-25 15:46 ` Thomas Monjalon
  2021-03-25 16:40   ` Aaron Conole
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2021-03-25 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: aconole, honnappa.nagarahalli; +Cc: dev, david.marchand, ruifeng.wang

16/04/2020 13:00, Thomas Monjalon:
> Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
> https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
> 
> In order to get reliable Travis reports,
> the use of Arm machines is removed until Travis fixes it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>

We managed without applying this patch.

After one year passed, what is the situation today regarding Travis?
Can we rely on Travis service?
For which workload? Which architecture?

Aaron, what do you recommend?



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2021-03-25 15:46 ` Thomas Monjalon
@ 2021-03-25 16:40   ` Aaron Conole
  2021-03-25 17:11     ` Thomas Monjalon
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Conole @ 2021-03-25 16:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: honnappa.nagarahalli, dev, david.marchand, ruifeng.wang

Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:

> 16/04/2020 13:00, Thomas Monjalon:
>> Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
>> https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
>> 
>> In order to get reliable Travis reports,
>> the use of Arm machines is removed until Travis fixes it.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>
> We managed without applying this patch.
>
> After one year passed, what is the situation today regarding Travis?
> Can we rely on Travis service?

So far, yes.

> For which workload? Which architecture?

I think for all of them.  Looking at even the failures which pop up for
the latest patches, they seem like real failures.

ex:
  https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493722400
  https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493688879
  https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493624012
  https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493611597

These are ABI, and doc failures - different arches, etc.

Seems like it's quite usable.

> Aaron, what do you recommend?

I think we should drop this patch - Travis continues to be useful even
for individual developers checking their own results.  It seems the
service works quite a bit better now for the project as well, thanks to
Honnappa and other ARM folks for working with them.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs
  2021-03-25 16:40   ` Aaron Conole
@ 2021-03-25 17:11     ` Thomas Monjalon
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2021-03-25 17:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: honnappa.nagarahalli, david.marchand, ruifeng.wang, Aaron Conole; +Cc: dev

25/03/2021 17:40, Aaron Conole:
> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
> >> Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC:
> >> https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6
> >> 
> >> In order to get reliable Travis reports,
> >> the use of Arm machines is removed until Travis fixes it.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> >
> > We managed without applying this patch.
> >
> > After one year passed, what is the situation today regarding Travis?
> > Can we rely on Travis service?
> 
> So far, yes.
> 
> > For which workload? Which architecture?
> 
> I think for all of them.  Looking at even the failures which pop up for
> the latest patches, they seem like real failures.
> 
> ex:
>   https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493722400
>   https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493688879
>   https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493624012
>   https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493611597
> 
> These are ABI, and doc failures - different arches, etc.
> 
> Seems like it's quite usable.
> 
> > Aaron, what do you recommend?
> 
> I think we should drop this patch - Travis continues to be useful even
> for individual developers checking their own results.  It seems the
> service works quite a bit better now for the project as well, thanks to
> Honnappa and other ARM folks for working with them.

Thanks all, patch classified as "Rejected".






^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-03-25 17:12 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-04-16 11:00 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: remove aarch64 from Travis jobs Thomas Monjalon
2020-04-16 12:44 ` Aaron Conole
2020-04-16 13:30   ` Jerin Jacob
2020-04-16 13:43   ` David Marchand
2020-04-16 13:45     ` Aaron Conole
2020-04-16 14:39       ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-04-16 15:55         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-16 17:08           ` Aaron Conole
2020-04-19  8:01           ` David Marchand
2020-04-20 15:35             ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-04-16 17:07         ` Aaron Conole
2020-04-17  8:49         ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-04-17 10:09           ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-03-25 15:46 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-03-25 16:40   ` Aaron Conole
2021-03-25 17:11     ` Thomas Monjalon

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git