> -----Original Message----- > From: David Marchand <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2023 9:30 AM > To: Van Haaren, Harry <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; mattias.ronnblom > <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Morten Brørup > <[email protected]>; Tyler Retzlaff <[email protected]>; > Aaron Conole <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] test/service: fix spurious failures by extending > timeout > > Hello Harry,
Hi David, > On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 9:33 PM David Marchand <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 3:27 PM Morten Brørup <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > This commit extends the timeout for service_may_be_active() > > > > from 100ms to 1000ms. Local testing on a idle and loaded system > > > > (compiling DPDK with all cores) always completes after 1 ms. > > > > > > > > The wait time for a service-lcore to finish is also extended > > > > from 100ms to 1000ms. > > > > > > > > The same timeout waiting code was duplicated in two tests, and > > > > is now refactored to a standalone function avoiding duplication. > > > > > > > > Reported-by: David Marchand <[email protected]> > > > > Suggested-by: Mattias Ronnblom <[email protected]> > > > > Signed-off-by: Harry van Haaren <[email protected]> > > > Acked-by: Morten Brørup <[email protected]> > > Reviewed-by: Mattias Rönnblom <[email protected]> > > > > Ok, let's see if the situation gets better with this. > > Applied, thanks. > > I took a look at the january month failures at UNH. > > Downloads/dpdk_31608e4db568_2023-01-03_06-58-00_NA/out/testlog.txt:EAL: > Test assert service_lcore_attr_get line 422 failed: Service lcore not > stopped after waiting. > Extending the timeout just made it less likely. Aha, okay. <snip> > The timeout approach just does not have its place in a functional test. > Either this test is rewritten, or it must go to the performance tests > list so that we stop getting false positives. > Can you work on this? I'll investigate various approaches on Thursday and reply here with suggested next steps. Regards, -Harry
