Open Stack

Dane, thanks for all the great work you're doing in the third-party CI
area. It's great to see you working to share this knowledge with
others as well!

Did Kevin's idea work for you to move past this issue? If not, I
suggest you put an item on the neutron meeting agenda today and we
cover this there. You could put the item on the third-party meeting
agenda as well.

Thanks!
Kyle

On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Dane Leblanc (leblancd)
<leblancd at cisco.com> wrote:
> Hi Kevin:
>
>
>
> Thanks, this is a great idea! I may try just a slight variation of this
> concept. Maybe your idea could be the recommended way to create a 3rd party
> CI for plugins that are just being introduced and need to limit the scope of
> testing to a small set of plugin-related commits (or plugins blocked on a
> certain fix).
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Dane
>
>
>
> From: Kevin Benton [mailto:blak111 at gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2014 5:47 AM
>
>
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are required
> to be run
>
>
>
> Can you disable posting of results directly from your Jenkins/Zuul setup and
> have a script that just checks the log file for special markers to determine
> if the vote should be FAILED/PASSED/SKIPPED? Another advantage of this
> approach is that it gives you an opportunity to detect when a job just
> failed to setup due to infrastructure reasons and trigger a recheck without
> ever first posting a failure to gerrit.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Dane Leblanc (leblancd)
> <leblancd at cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Edgar for updating the APIC status!!!
>
> Edgar and Kyle: *****PLEASE NOTE******!!!!  I need your understanding and
> advice on the following:
>
> We are still stuck with a problem stemming from a design limitation of
> Jenkins that prevents us from being compliant with Neutron 3rd Party CI
> requirements for our DFA CI.
>
> The issue is that Jenkins only allows our scripts to (programmatically)
> return either Success or Fail. There is no option to return "Aborted", "Not
> Tested", or "Skipped".
>
> Why does this matter? The DFA plugin is just being introduced, and initial
> DFA-enabling change sets have not yet been merged. Therefore, all other
> change sets will fail our Tempest tests, since they are not DFA-enabled.
>
> Similarly, we were recently blocked in our APIC CI with a critical bug,
> causing all change sets without this fix to fail on our APIC testbed.
>
> In these cases, we would like to enter a "throttled" or "partially blocked"
> mode, where we would skip testing on change sets we know will fail, and (in
> an ideal world) signal this shortcoming to Gerrit e.g. by returning a
> "Skipped" status. Unfortunately, this option is not available in Jenkins
> scripts, as Jenkins is currently designed. The only options we have
> available is "Success" or all "Fail", which are both misleading. We would
> also incorrectly report success or fail on one of the following test
> commits:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114393/
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/40296/
>
> I've brought this issue up on the openstack-infra IRC, and jeblair confirmed
> the Jenkins limitation, but asked me to get consensus from the Neutron
> community as to this being a problem/requirement. I've also sent out an
> e-mail on the Neutron ML trying to start a discussion on this problem (no
> traction). I plan on bringing this up in the 3rd Party CI IRC on Monday,
> assuming there is time permitted in the open discussion.
>
> I'm also investigating
>
> For the short term, I would like to propose the following:
> * We bring this up on the 3rd Party CI IRC on Monday to get a solution or
> workaround, if available. If a solution is available, let's consider
> including that as a hint when we come up with CI requirements for handling
> CIs bocked by some critical fix.
> * I'm also looking into using a REST API to cancel a Jenkins job
> programmatically.
> * If no solution or workaround is available, we work with infra team or with
> Jenkins team to create a solution.
> * Until a solution is available, for plugins which are blocked by a critical
> bug, we post a status/notes indicating the plugin's situation on our 3rd
> party CI status wiki, e.g.:
>
> Vendor                  Plugin/Driver Name      Contact Name
> Status  Notes
> My Vendor Name  My Plugin CI            My Contact Person       T
> Throttled / Partially blocked / Awaiting Intial Commits
>
> The status/notes should be clear and understood by the Neutron team.  The
> console logs for change sets where the tests were skipped should also
> contain a message that all testing is being skipped for that commit.
>
> Note that when the DFA initial commits are merged, then this issue would go
> away for the DFA CI. However, this problem will reappear every time a
> blocking critical bug shows up for a 3rd party CI setup, or a new plugin is
> introduced and the hardware-enabling commits are not yet merged.  (That is,
> until we have a solution for the Jenkins limitation).
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Dane
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.magana at workday.com]
>
> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 1:57 PM
> To: Dane Leblanc (leblancd); OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for
> usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are required
> to be run
>
> Sorry my bad but I just changed.
>
> Edgar
>
> On 8/21/14, 2:13 PM, "Dane Leblanc (leblancd)" <leblancd at cisco.com> wrote:
>
>>Edgar:
>>
>>I'm still seeing the comment "Results are not accurate. Needs
>>clarification..."
>>
>>Dane
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.magana at workday.com]
>>Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 2:58 PM
>>To: Dane Leblanc (leblancd); OpenStack Development Mailing List (not
>>for usage questions)
>>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are
>>required to be run
>>
>>Dane,
>>
>>Wiki has been updated.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Edgar
>>
>>On 8/21/14, 7:57 AM, "Dane Leblanc (leblancd)" <leblancd at cisco.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Edgar:
>>>
>>>The status on the wiki page says "Results are not accurate. Needs
>>>clarification from Cisco".
>>>Can you please tell me what we are missing?
>>>
>>>-Dane
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Dane Leblanc (leblancd)
>>>Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 3:05 PM
>>>To: 'Edgar Magana'; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>>>questions)
>>>Subject: RE: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are
>>>required to be run
>>>
>>>The APIC CI did run tests against that commit (after some queue latency):
>>>
>>>http://128.107.233.28:8080/job/apic/1860/
>>>http://cisco-neutron-ci.cisco.com/logs/apic/1860/
>>>
>>>But the review comments never showed up on Gerrit. This seems to be an
>>>intermittent quirk of Jenkins/Gerrit: We have 3 CIs triggered from
>>>this Jenkins/Gerrit server. Whenever we disable another one of our
>>>other Jenkins jobs (in this case, we disabled DFA for some rework),
>>>the review comments sometimes stop showing up on Gerrit.
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.magana at workday.com]
>>>Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 1:33 PM
>>>To: Dane Leblanc (leblancd); OpenStack Development Mailing List (not
>>>for usage questions)
>>>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are
>>>required to be run
>>>
>>>I was looking to one of the most recent Neutron commits:
>>>https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115175/
>>>
>>>
>>>I could not find the APIC report.
>>>
>>>Edgar
>>>
>>>On 8/19/14, 9:48 AM, "Dane Leblanc (leblancd)" <leblancd at cisco.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>From which commit is it missing?
>>>>https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114629/
>>>>https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114393/
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.magana at workday.com]
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 12:28 PM
>>>>To: Dane Leblanc (leblancd); OpenStack Development Mailing List (not
>>>>for usage questions)
>>>>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are
>>>>required to be run
>>>>
>>>>Dane,
>>>>
>>>>Are you sure about it?
>>>>I just went to this commit and I could not find the APIC tests.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>Edgar
>>>>
>>>>On 8/17/14, 8:47 PM, "Dane Leblanc (leblancd)" <leblancd at cisco.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Edgar:
>>>>>
>>>>>The Cisco APIC should be reporting results for both APIC-related and
>>>>>non-APIC related changes now.
>>>>>(See http://cisco-neutron-ci.cisco.com/logs/apic/1738/).
>>>>>
>>>>>Will you be updating the wiki page?
>>>>>
>>>>>-Dane
>>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: Dane Leblanc (leblancd)
>>>>>Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 8:18 PM
>>>>>To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are
>>>>>required to be run
>>>>>
>>>>>Also, you can add me as a contact person for the Cisco VPNaaS driver.
>>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: Dane Leblanc (leblancd)
>>>>>Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 8:14 PM
>>>>>To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>>Subject: RE: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are
>>>>>required to be run
>>>>>
>>>>>Edgar:
>>>>>
>>>>>For the Notes for the Cisco APIC, can you change the comment
>>>>>"results are fake" to something like "results are only valid for
>>>>>APIC-related commits"? I think this more accurately represents our
>>>>>current results (for reasons we chatted about on another thread).
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>Dane
>>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.magana at workday.com]
>>>>>Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 6:36 PM
>>>>>To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are
>>>>>required to be run
>>>>>Importance: High
>>>>>
>>>>>Team,
>>>>>
>>>>>I did a quick audit on the Neutron CI. Very sad results. Only few
>>>>>plugins and drivers are running properly and testing all Neutron
>>>>>commits.
>>>>>I created a report here:
>>>>>https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron_Plugins_and_Drivers#Existing
>>>>>_
>>>>>P
>>>>>l
>>>>>ugi
>>>>>n
>>>>>_and_Drivers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>We will discuss the actions to take on the next Neutron IRC meeting.
>>>>>So please, reach me out to clarify what is the status of your CI.
>>>>>I had two commits to quickly verify the CI reliability:
>>>>>
>>>>>https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114393/
>>>>>
>>>>>https://review.openstack.org/#/c/40296/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I would expect all plugins and drivers passing on the first one and
>>>>>failing for the second but I got so many surprises.
>>>>>
>>>>>Neutron code quality and reliability is a top priority, if you
>>>>>ignore this report that plugin/driver will be candidate to be remove
>>>>>from Neutron tree.
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>>Edgar
>>>>>
>>>>>P.s. I hate to be the inquisitor hereŠ but someone has to do the
>>>>>dirty job!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On 8/14/14, 8:30 AM, "Kyle Mestery" <mestery at mestery.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Folks, I'm not sure if all CI accounts are running sufficient tests.
>>>>>>Per the requirements wiki page here [1], everyone needs to be
>>>>>>running more than just Tempest API tests, which I still see most
>>>>>>neutron third-party CI setups doing. I'd like to ask everyone who
>>>>>>operates a third-party CI account for Neutron to please look at the
>>>>>>link below and make sure you are running appropriate tests. If you
>>>>>>have questions, the weekly third-party meeting [2] is a great place
>>>>>>to ask questions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>>Kyle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NeutronThirdPartyTesting
>>>>>>[2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty
>>>>>>
>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>>>OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>>OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>>OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Kevin Benton
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>