Hi Sebastian, On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 10:01 PM Sebastian Ramacher <sramac...@debian.org> wrote: > > On 2022-11-06 11:36:16 +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 8:14 PM Sebastian Ramacher <sramac...@debian.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > Control: tags -1 confirmed > > > > > > On 2022-11-05 00:11:07 +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > > > Control: tags -1 - moreinfo > > > > -- > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 10:22:32PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
<snip> > > > > > > > > Please consider libbpf for transition. > > > > > > Please go ahead > > > > Thanks. Has been uploaded. > > The autopkgtests of dpdk regressed on amd64: > https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/amd64/d/dpdk/28081847/log.gz > Could you please take a look? I have seen that, and also noticed that the test was with dpdk from testing which is not rebuilt with libbpf from unstable. So I triggered a new job to see the result of dpdk/unstable with libbpf/unstable. https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/unstable/amd64/d/dpdk/28109044/log.gz The job you linked uses dpdk/21.11-5+b1 And, the job I triggered uses dpdk/21.11-5+b2 which is the binnmu for libbpf transition. And, the test passed. Not sure if I need to do something for it. -- Regards Sudip
