On Fri, 2018-01-12 at 20:32 +0100, Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
> Am 12.01.2018 um 19:49 schrieb Andrew Bartlett:
> > G'Day All.
> >
> > I ran some tests overnight as promised.
> >
> > The first thing to say is that we (sadly) need to drop Douglas'
> > visualisation patches. There are some python errors in the error cases
> > which show up only at the end of a full run (because the DB has junk in
> > it) that are not handled.
> >
> > Then I think we need to run tests on less than this full branch.
> >
> > I'll try:
> > - master plus the flapping additions
> > - metze's branch minus Douglas' patches
>
> I fixed Douglas' patches and your talloc patches.
>
> > - asn's branch with the flapping additions (but not whoami)
>
> I think these can wait.
>
> > We historically have always got into a muddle when we combine
> > everybody's patch into one push, it feels like it would save time but
> > actually takes longer: This is because it assumes that all the patches
> > work, and for example I've put in good, tested code that failed, but
> > should have just failed its own autobuild, not held up yours.
> >
> > For master, I think some builds with just the flapping tests marked
> > would be good, then put that in. Then do the rest by topic, owned by
> > the author.
> >
> > In the medium term, Jamie (one of my new developers at Catalyst) is
> > working to untangle our testsuite inter-dependences. The aim here is
> > to find sets of tests that:
> > - are reliable
> > - do no depend on each other
> > - consume < 4GB of RAM
> > - take less than 1 hour
> >
> > (And then to split these into parallel test environments)
> >
> > At Catalyst, running cloud builds for test is quite normal, often
> > before posting and generally before pushing. But I've noticed that
> > even for me that the closer I get to the release deadline, the less
> > likely I am to wait for a full 5 hour build for the absolute final
> > patch. I'm more likely to do what I did with the talloc patch: trust
> > earlier tests on different code and the newly written tests and aim at
> > autobuild.
> >
> > What I would like to get to is a norm where when posting patches for
> > review, we post them to (say) gitlab by habit, and by the time they are
> > reviewed a clear 'passed/failed' flag is shown so we don't waste time
> > on patches that won't pass.
>
> It would be nice to have that.
>
> > In the meantime I'll run our 5-hour testsuite a few more times in hope
> > of getting the data on what can safely land for 4.8.
>
> Please you my latest autobuild branch.
3 of your autobuild and 2 of 'no-catalyst-for-4.8' of these just failed
with:
[1533(9721)/2234 at 2h13m38s] samba4.nbt.dgram(ad_dc_ntvfs)
netlogon reply from 127.0.0.33:138
netlogon reply from 127.0.0.33:138
netlogon reply from 127.0.0.33:138
netlogon reply from 127.0.0.33:138
UNEXPECTED(failure): samba4.nbt.dgram.netlogon2(ad_dc_ntvfs)
REASON: Exception: Exception: ../source4/torture/nbt/dgram.c:396:
response->data.samlogon.data.nt5_ex.command was 21 (0x15), expected 19
(0x13): Got incorrect netlogon response command
or
[1533(9721)/2234 at 2h12m36s] samba4.nbt.dgram(ad_dc_ntvfs)
smbtorture 4.9.0pre1-DEVELOPERBUILD
Using seed 1515794453
UNEXPECTED(failure): samba4.nbt.dgram.netlogon(ad_dc_ntvfs)
REASON: Exception: Exception: ../source4/torture/nbt/dgram.c:148:
Expression `response != ((void *)0)' failed: Failed to receive a
netlogon reply packet
> It just failed with some really rare flapping tests, e.g.
> samba.nbt.dgram. We also saw some pam_winbindd failures,
> while setting up the ad_member env.
Two of the tests I did of Andreas's patch set (with the flapping
patches on top), and one on the catalyst-for-4-8 branch failed with:
[64(1161)/2230 at 49m50s] samba.tests.pam_winbind(local)(ad_member)
ERROR: Testsuite[samba.tests.pam_winbind(local)(ad_member)]
REASON: unable to set up environment ad_member - exiting
I think we should revert the change to make ad_member use ad_dc. I'll
test master with such a revert (and the flappy tests changes).
> I'll try a few more times with the whole branch, then I'll
> start pushing just the first chunks.
I'll put the autobuild results all in this link so you don't have to
guess from my summary, you can check the full details:
https://seafile.catalyst.net.nz/d/92adffd354044ffaa3c4/I remain at your disposal to work on builds for this (in between
spending the sunny weekend with the family).
Andrew Bartlett
--
Andrew Bartlett
http://samba.org/~abartlet/Authentication Developer, Samba Team
http://samba.orgSamba Developer, Catalyst IT
http://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba
Locked
signature.asc (853 bytes)