[dpdk-dev] [Bug 826] red_autotest random failures

[Dumitrescu, Cristian]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2021 7:26 AM
> To: Dumitrescu, Cristian <cristian.dumitrescu at intel.com>; David Marchand
> <david.marchand at redhat.com>; Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie at iol.unh.edu>;
> Ajmera, Megha <megha.ajmera at intel.com>; Singh, Jasvinder
> <jasvinder.singh at intel.com>; Liguzinski, WojciechX
> <wojciechx.liguzinski at intel.com>
> Cc: dev <dev at dpdk.org>; Aaron Conole <aconole at redhat.com>; Yigit,
> Ferruh <ferruh.yigit at intel.com>; ci at dpdk.org; Zegota, AnnaX
> <annax.zegota at intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [Bug 826] red_autotest random failures
> 
> 18/11/2021 23:10, Liguzinski, WojciechX:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was trying to reproduce this test failure, but for me RED tests are passing.
> > I was running the exact test command like the one described in Bug 826 -
> 'red_autotest' on the current main branch.
> 
> The test is not always failing.
> There are some failing conditions, please find them.
> I think you should try in a container with more limited resources.
> 

Hi Thomas,

This is not a fair request IMO. We want to avoid wasting everybody's time, including Wojciech's time. Can the bug originator provide the details on the setup to reproduce the failure, please? Thank you!

On a different point, we should probably tweak our autotests to differentiate between logical failures and those failures related to resources not being available, and flag the test result accordingly in the report. For example, if memory allocation fails, the test should be flagged as "Not enough resources" instead of simply "Failed". In the first case, the next step should be fixing the test setup, while in the second case the next step should be fixing the code. What do people think on this?

Regards,
Cristian