Open Stack

On 2 February 2016 at 19:03, Matthew Treinish <mtreinish at kortar.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 05:09:47PM -0800, Armando M. wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > We have some IPv6 related bugs [1,2,3] that have been lingering for some
> > time now. They have been hurting the gate (e.g. [4] the most recent
> > offending failure) and since it looks like they have been without owners
> > nor a plan of action for some time, I made the hard decision of skipping
> > them [5] ahead of the busy times ahead.
>
> So TBH I don't think the failure rate for these tests are really at a point
> necessitating a skip:
>
>
> http://status.openstack.org/openstack-health/#/test/tempest.scenario.test_network_v6.TestGettingAddress.test_multi_prefix_slaac
>
> http://status.openstack.org/openstack-health/#/test/tempest.scenario.test_network_v6.TestGettingAddress.test_dualnet_dhcp6_stateless_from_os
>
> http://status.openstack.org/openstack-health/#/test/tempest.scenario.test_network_v6.TestGettingAddress.test_dhcp6_stateless_from_os
>
> (also just a cool side-note, you can see the very obvious performance
> regression
> caused by the keystonemiddleware release and when we excluded that version
> in
> requirements)
>
> Well, test_dualnet_dhcp6_stateless_from_os is kinda there with a ~10%
> failure
> rate, but the other 2 really aren't. I normally would be -1 on the skip
> patch
> because of that. We try to save the skips for cases where the bugs are
> really
> severe and preventing productivity at a large scale.
>

I am being overly aggressive here, just because I am conscious of the time
of the year :)


>
> But, in this case these ipv6 tests are kinda of out of place in tempest.
> Having
> all the permutations of possible ip allocation configurations always
> seemed a
> bit too heavy handed. These tests are also consistently in the top 10
> slowest
> for a run. We really should have trimmed down this set a while ago so
> we're only
> have a single case in tempest. Neutron should own the other possible
> configurations as an in-tree test.
>

+1


>
> Brian Haley has a patch up from Dec. that was trying to clean it up:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/239868/
>
> We probably should revisit that soon, since quite clearly no one is
> looking at
> these right now.
>
>
I thought that had merged already...my memory doesn't serve me as it used
to anymore :(


>
> -Matt Treinish
>
>
> >
> > Now one might argue that skipping them is counterproductive because it
> may
> > allow other regressions to sneak in, but I am hoping that this
> > controversial action will indeed smoke out the right folks.
> >
> > Comments welcome.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Armando
> >
> > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1477192
> > [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1509004
> > [3] https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-gate/+bug/1540983
> > [4]
> >
> http://logs.openstack.org/37/264937/5/gate/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full/afeaabd//logs/testr_results.html.gz
> > [5] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/275457/
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160202/f517c889/attachment.html>