On 24/02/2021 16:12:21-0600, Anibal Limon wrote:

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 at 16:09, Alexandre Belloni <
alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> wrote:

Hello Anibal,

You are the next one on the list
(https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Build_Failure_Swat_Team#Members)
and you ar scheduled to be on SWAT duty next week.

Ack,

If you are available, it would be beneficial for you to attend the bug
triage call this week. You'll find the Zoom call link and mor info on:
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Bug_Triage

I find the link in the page bu no datetime, when is the call?.

It's on Thursday, did you find it on
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/YoctoCalendar ?

Name is YP Weekly Triage Meeting


--
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

On 24/02/2021 23:09:25+0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:

Hello Anibal,

You are the next one on the list
(https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Build_Failure_Swat_Team#Members)
and you ar scheduled to be on SWAT duty next week.

If you are available, it would be beneficial for you to attend the bug
triage call this week. You'll find the Zoom call link and mor info on:
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Bug_Triage

And I forgot to add, calendar is here:
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/YoctoCalendar

--
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

Hello Anibal,

You are the next one on the list
(https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Build_Failure_Swat_Team#Members)
and you ar scheduled to be on SWAT duty next week.

If you are available, it would be beneficial for you to attend the bug
triage call this week. You'll find the Zoom call link and mor info on:
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Bug_Triage

Thanks!

--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

Hello,

Here are the statistics for last week. Both Ross and Jagadheesan were on SWAT duty.

570 failures were reported,
* 79 were triaged by Jagadheesan
- 50 were not for SWAT but marked for SWAT
- 9 were cancelled builds with no other issue
- 3 reoccurrences of bug 14223
- 3 occurrences of new bug 14243
- 2 occurrences of new bug 14241
- 2 occurrences of new bug 14244
- 1 reoccurrence of bug 13802
- 1 reoccurrence of bug 14201
- 1 reoccurrence of bug 14206
- 1 reoccurrence of bug 14228
- 1 occurrence of new bug 14238
- 1 occurrence of new bug 14240
- 1 occurrence of new bug 14242
- 1 occurrence of new bug 14245
- 1 occurrence of new bug 14246
- 1 was a network failure on the worker

* 47 were triaged by Ross
- 35 occurrences of new bug 14234
- 6 were already fixed at the time they were triaged
- 3 reoccurrences of bug 14223
- 1 was not for SWAT
- 1 was a system configuration issue
- 1 was an autobuidler config issue (branch mismatch)

* 444 were triaged by Richard
- 142 for a patch failure he fixed
- 120 for a broken fix for nativesdk-dummy perl he updated
- 90 were cancelled builds with no other issue
- 36 for license errors he handled
- 24 for a linux-firmware issue reported by Khem on the list
- 7 for a license patch issue he handled
- 7 for an issue with the wpebackend-fdo upgrade
- 6 for a reproducibility issue in xorg
- 4 for a configuration issue in the reproducible target
- 4 for a reproducibility issue in cwautomacros
- 2 for a missing python3-git module on the worker
- 1 for a reproducibility issue in meson
- 1 for a reproducibility issue in vim

Regards,

--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

Hello Leonardo,

You are the next one on the list
(https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Build_Failure_Swat_Team#Members)
and SWAT duty will rotate from Jaga and Ross to you at EOD 2012-02-19.

Please reply to let me know whether you will be able to work on this
task.

I'll be available to walk you through the process on Monday, don't
hesitate to contact me by email or on IRC.

Thanks!

--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

Hello,

Here are the statistics for last week. Minjae Kim was on SWAT duty.

268 failures were reported,
* 118 were triaged by Minjae
- 25 for issues with the events patch, replied on list by Richard
- 20 were cancelled build with no other errors
- 17 for an issue in shaderc/glslang patches
- 16 meta-arm warnings for u-boot that are now fixed
- 5 meta-oe issues
- 2 for configuration issues that got fixed by Michael
- 2 for an EXTERNALSRC patch Richard replied on list
- 2 for a previously known issue, the patch was dropped at triage time
- 7 reoccurrences of bug 13802
- 1 reoccurrence of bug 13810
- 1 reoccurrence of bug 13841
- 2 reoccurrences of bug 13992
- 3 reoccurrences of bug 14029
- 1 reoccurrence of bug 14158
- 1 reoccurrence of bug 14163
- 1 reoccurrence of bug 14164
- 1 reoccurrence of bug 14209
- 7 reoccurrences of bug 14223
- 1 occurrence of new bug 14227
- 2 occurrences of new bug 14228
- 1 occurrence of new bug 14230

* 150 were triaged by Richard
- 44 for a broken patch he refreshed
- 43 were due to the events patch
- 34 were a logging patch that got fixed
- 26 were because of storage space issues on the controller
- 2 for pigz+uninative issue on a worker
- 1 new occurrence of 14183

Many of the reoccurring bugs were related to various ptests failing.

Regards,

--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

While looking at the changelog, it is useful to be able to go back to the
build collection editing, for example to be able to correct a note.

Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
---
swatapp/templates/swatapp/changelog.html | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/swatapp/templates/swatapp/changelog.html b/swatapp/templates/swatapp/changelog.html
index 6f15196c16dd..f28abaefe187 100644
--- a/swatapp/templates/swatapp/changelog.html
+++ b/swatapp/templates/swatapp/changelog.html
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
{% if changes %}
<ul>
{% for change in changes %}
- <li>{{ change.user.username }} changed {{ change.failure.build.targetname }}:{{ change.failure.stepname }} {{ change.failure.build.buildid }}:{{ change.failure.id }} from {{ change.get_oldstatus_display }} to {{ change.get_newstatus_display }} on {{ change.timestamp }}: {{ change.newnote }}</li>
+ <li>{{ change.user.username }} changed {{ change.failure.build.targetname }}:{{ change.failure.stepname }} <a href="/collection/{{ change.failure.build.buildcollection.id }}/">{{ change.failure.build.buildid }}:{{ change.failure.id }}</a> from {{ change.get_oldstatus_display }} to {{ change.get_newstatus_display }} on {{ change.timestamp }}: {{ change.newnote }}</li>
{% endfor %}
</ul>

--
2.29.2

Hi Jaga,

On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 at 17:34, Duraisamy, Jagadheesan
<Jagadheesan_Duraisamy@comcast.com> wrote:

I can take-up this week, if you are not prepared for the short notice.

We can tag team it - a single problem caused a *lot* of failure over
the weekend that I mostly cleaned up earlier, but there's still some
outstanding in swatbot.

If you see more builds failing in do_package with UID issues, that's
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14234.

Ross

Hello Ross,

I can take-up this week, if you are not prepared for the short notice.

Regards
Jaga

Hi Alexandre,

I have missed seeing the email, sorry about that.

Regards
Jaga

On Sun, 2021-02-14 at 13:17 -0600, Joshua Watt wrote:

On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 6:19 AM Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

Regular users of the autobuilder will note that I've split the
reproducible builds test out of the main oe-selftest build and into its
own target build. This is because that test tends to run for a lot
longer time period and it helps to see the result separately.

I've only done this for master. If gatesgarth and dunfell want to
follow, that should be straight forward with a change to the branch in
autobuilder-helper. Obviously we should ensure this is working ok with
master first but so far so good.

It has already highlighted the difference between a successful run:

https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/115/builds/2
https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/119/builds/2
(took 3-4 hours)

and failing two failing runs:

https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/116/builds/2
https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/118/builds/2
(took 9 hours)

OK, I read through the code and unfortunately found a bug: when
attempting to make sure the "B" build doesn't use sstate, I misspelled
the SSTATE_MIRRORS, which means that the B build could have been
pulling from the sstate mirror when it was not supposed to. This has a
few implications:

 1) It might explain why some of the reproducible results seem intermittent
 2) It might explain why there is such a time disparity between the tests

The "good" news is that this didn't affect the autobuilder as it sets
SSTATE_DIR to a common directory and doesn't use SSTATE_MIRRORS.

Unfortunately, while it probably will help the intermittent results,
it probably means that the tests taking 9 hours is what is "supposed"
to happen, and they happen to be shorter sometimes because the B build
is pulling from sstate when it's not supposed to.

I don't think we're to the bottom of this. If its not spending the time
in diffoscope, something seems to cause builds with differences to take
much longer...

Cheers,

Richard

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 12:21 AM Alexander Kanavin
<alex.kanavin@gmail.com> wrote:

I’ve definitely seen diffoscope process take hours and hours and hours in local builds. Trying it with these vim packages locally should still be done.

I forgot to mention that I did run diffoscope locally with the
offending vim packages and it took about 30 seconds (same as the AB
logs showed)

Alex

On Sun 14. Feb 2021 at 20.18, Joshua Watt <jpewhacker@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 6:19 AM Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

Regular users of the autobuilder will note that I've split the
reproducible builds test out of the main oe-selftest build and into its
own target build. This is because that test tends to run for a lot
longer time period and it helps to see the result separately.

I've only done this for master. If gatesgarth and dunfell want to
follow, that should be straight forward with a change to the branch in
autobuilder-helper. Obviously we should ensure this is working ok with
master first but so far so good.

It has already highlighted the difference between a successful run:

https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/115/builds/2
https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/119/builds/2
(took 3-4 hours)

and failing two failing runs:

https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/116/builds/2
https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/118/builds/2
(took 9 hours)

OK, I read through the code and unfortunately found a bug: when
attempting to make sure the "B" build doesn't use sstate, I misspelled
the SSTATE_MIRRORS, which means that the B build could have been
pulling from the sstate mirror when it was not supposed to. This has a
few implications:

1) It might explain why some of the reproducible results seem intermittent
2) It might explain why there is such a time disparity between the tests

Unfortunately, while it probably will help the intermittent results,
it probably means that the tests taking 9 hours is what is "supposed"
to happen, and they happen to be shorter sometimes because the B build
is pulling from sstate when it's not supposed to.

the time difference being the system trying to run diffoscope on vim-
common :/.

I'm aware I removed some recipes from the exclusions list after seeing
multiple passing builds for all distros and we're now seeing test
failures. My mistake was not waiting for the date to change and for
builds to run on an autobuilder worker with a different umask.

Meson is failing with a pyc file mismatch which diffoscope can't decode
and despite trying for 5 hours, diffoscope hasn't given any data on why
vim-common differs. I should have fixes in for quilt, valgrind, kernel-
devsrc and cwautomacros. The umask fix may fix other issues too. Alex
has improved the reporting so we can spot cases where exclusion is now
longer needed.

Cheers,

Richard

Hello Ross,

Since I didn't get any reply from Jagadheesan and you were the next one
on the list (and we discussed that on IRC), you will be on SWAT duty
this week.

I know this is short notice and I'll try to assist as much as possible if
you need so.

Thanks!

--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

Hi All,

There are a number of failures on the autobuilder in do_package with
odd unknown user issues. My guess is that its related to the new
buildtools tarball I configured in the helper. I'm going to guess we're
missing a glibc syscall with the new glibc.

I'll look into it as a priority.

Cheers,

Richard

On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 6:19 AM Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

Regular users of the autobuilder will note that I've split the
reproducible builds test out of the main oe-selftest build and into its
own target build. This is because that test tends to run for a lot
longer time period and it helps to see the result separately.

I've only done this for master. If gatesgarth and dunfell want to
follow, that should be straight forward with a change to the branch in
autobuilder-helper. Obviously we should ensure this is working ok with
master first but so far so good.

It has already highlighted the difference between a successful run:

https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/115/builds/2
https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/119/builds/2
(took 3-4 hours)

and failing two failing runs:

https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/116/builds/2
https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/118/builds/2
(took 9 hours)

OK, I read through the code and unfortunately found a bug: when
attempting to make sure the "B" build doesn't use sstate, I misspelled
the SSTATE_MIRRORS, which means that the B build could have been
pulling from the sstate mirror when it was not supposed to. This has a
few implications:

1) It might explain why some of the reproducible results seem intermittent
2) It might explain why there is such a time disparity between the tests

Unfortunately, while it probably will help the intermittent results,
it probably means that the tests taking 9 hours is what is "supposed"
to happen, and they happen to be shorter sometimes because the B build
is pulling from sstate when it's not supposed to.

the time difference being the system trying to run diffoscope on vim-
common :/.

I'm aware I removed some recipes from the exclusions list after seeing
multiple passing builds for all distros and we're now seeing test
failures. My mistake was not waiting for the date to change and for
builds to run on an autobuilder worker with a different umask.

Meson is failing with a pyc file mismatch which diffoscope can't decode
and despite trying for 5 hours, diffoscope hasn't given any data on why
vim-common differs. I should have fixes in for quilt, valgrind, kernel-
devsrc and cwautomacros. The umask fix may fix other issues too. Alex
has improved the reporting so we can spot cases where exclusion is now
longer needed.

Cheers,

Richard

On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 6:19 AM Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

Regular users of the autobuilder will note that I've split the
reproducible builds test out of the main oe-selftest build and into its
own target build. This is because that test tends to run for a lot
longer time period and it helps to see the result separately.

I've only done this for master. If gatesgarth and dunfell want to
follow, that should be straight forward with a change to the branch in
autobuilder-helper. Obviously we should ensure this is working ok with
master first but so far so good.

It has already highlighted the difference between a successful run:

https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/115/builds/2
https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/119/builds/2
(took 3-4 hours)

and failing two failing runs:

https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/116/builds/2
https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/118/builds/2
(took 9 hours)

the time difference being the system trying to run diffoscope on vim-
common :/.

I'm not sure that diffoscope is the culprit here. If you look at the
logs, you can see that there is only about 30 seconds between the
"Running diffoscope" log message and the end of the test. I suspect
something else is going wrong here. I can try to write up patch to try
and add more logging so we can more accurately pinpoint where it's
taking so long.

I'm aware I removed some recipes from the exclusions list after seeing
multiple passing builds for all distros and we're now seeing test
failures. My mistake was not waiting for the date to change and for
builds to run on an autobuilder worker with a different umask.

Meson is failing with a pyc file mismatch which diffoscope can't decode
and despite trying for 5 hours, diffoscope hasn't given any data on why
vim-common differs. I should have fixes in for quilt, valgrind, kernel-
devsrc and cwautomacros. The umask fix may fix other issues too. Alex
has improved the reporting so we can spot cases where exclusion is now
longer needed.

Cheers,

Richard