Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-ci] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab

["Zawadzki, Tomasz" <tomasz.zawadzki@intel.com>]

Hi,

As Aaron noted this was result of rte_ethdev depending on rte_net.
On SPDK side rte_net was included in default compilation with vhost component, but since vhost is disabled in the UNH lab tests with SPDK it showed up as missing. A fix for that is now submitted to SPDK:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6398
I'll let you know when it makes it's way to the v21.01.x branch.

@Brandon Lo General question, is there particular reason to disable vhost [configure argument '--without-vhost'] in the UNH lab tests with SPDK ?
I don't recall any identified issue and enabling it would increase the coverage of the compilation tests.

Thanks,
Tomek

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 3:02 PM
> To: Brandon Lo <blo@iol.unh.edu>
> Cc: Zawadzki, Tomasz <tomasz.zawadzki@intel.com>; Lincoln Lavoie
> <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org;
> spdk@lists.01.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures
> @ DPDK community lab
> 
> Brandon Lo <blo@iol.unh.edu> writes:
> 
> > Hi again everyone,
> >
> > I have checked the pipelines with SPDK branch v21.01.x on the main DPDK
> branch.
> > It still seems to have an issue with compilation, and I have attached
> > a log of a Fedora SPDK compilation.
> > There are some undefined references to "rte_ether_unformat_addr"
> > I will continue to look into this. If you have any ideas on how to fix
> > this, please let me know.
> 
> Looks like rte_ethdev depends on rte_net - maybe I missed something.
> 
> Brandon, can we disable this test for the time being since it's been failing for
> a while now?  Can you also send me the container image / definitions you're
> using so that I can help work on this?
> 
> > Thanks,
> > Brandon
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:07 AM Brandon Lo <blo@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> I will adjust the branches and watch over the first few pipelines to
> >> make sure everything goes smoothly.
> >>
> >> Thanks for the update,
> >> Brandon
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:13 AM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Zawadzki, Tomasz" <tomasz.zawadzki@intel.com> writes:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi Lincoln,
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even from a
> >> > few hours ago).  I suppose the lab side might need some adjustment,
> too?
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against
> >> > > dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if this
> >> > > is what you are seeing on your end too.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > >
> >> > > Tomek
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> >> > > Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM
> >> > > To: Zawadzki, Tomasz <tomasz.zawadzki@intel.com>
> >> > > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; Brandon Lo
> >> > > <blo@iol.unh.edu>; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
> >> > > dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
> >> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures
> >> > > @ DPDK community lab
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks Tomek,
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make sure
> >> > > the next set of builds pass or see what the next failure is. :-P
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Cheers,
> >> > > Lincoln
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
> <tomasz.zawadzki@intel.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >  Hi Aaron,
> >> > >
> >> > >  Thank you for reporting this !
> >> > >
> >> > >  This is an issue with rte_power now depending on rte_ethdev, which
> was resolved on latest SPDK.
> >> > >
> >> > >  I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK branch
> >> > > for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK  release,
> >> > > would be v21.01.x:
> >> > >  https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x
> >> > >
> >> > >  The fix has been backported to that branch and should be merged
> shortly:
> >> > >  https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320
> >> > >
> >> > >  Thanks,
> >> > >  Tomek
> >> > >
> >> > >  > -----Original Message-----
> >> > >  > From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Aaron Conole  >
> >> > > Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM  > To: Brandon Lo
> >> > > <blo@iol.unh.edu>  > Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
> >> > > dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org  > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK
> >> > > compilation failures @ DPDK community lab  >  > Greetings,  >  >
> >> > > I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation in the UNH community
> >> > > lab seems  > to be failing, and I don't see an obvious reason for the
> failure.
> >> > >  > The logs haven't been too helpful - it appears that there is a
> >> > > symbol that isn't  > available when linking.
> >> > >  >
> >> > >  > Job details (for example):
> >> > >  > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/results/results-
> >> > >  >
> >> > >
> uploads/test_runs/2363efb43157465db3228c34c00ebd57/log_upload_fil
> >> > > e/20  > 21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip
> >> > >  >
> >> > >  > Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the
> >> > > compilation of  > SPDK?  Maybe show the arguments to the compiler
> for the specific object?
> >> > >  > Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong?
> >> > >  >
> >> > >  > Thanks,
> >> > >  > -Aaron
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Brandon Lo
> >>
> >> UNH InterOperability Laboratory
> >>
> >> 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
> >>
> >> blo@iol.unh.edu
> >>
> >> www.iol.unh.edu