Hi Lincoln,
That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x.
Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even from a few
hours ago). I suppose the lab side might need some adjustment, too?
The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if
this is what you are seeing on your end too.
Thanks,
Tomek
From: Lincoln Lavoie <redacted>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM
To: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; Brandon Lo <redacted>; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
Thanks Tomek,
Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make sure the next set of builds pass or see what the next failure
is. :-P
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Aaron,
Thank you for reporting this !
This is an issue with rte_power now depending on rte_ethdev, which was resolved on latest SPDK.
I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK branch for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK
release, would be v21.01.x:
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x
The fix has been backported to that branch and should be merged shortly:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320
Thanks,
Tomek
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [off-list ref] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole
> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM
> To: Brandon Lo [off-list ref]
> Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
>
> Greetings,
>
> I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation in the UNH community lab seems
> to be failing, and I don't see an obvious reason for the failure.
> The logs haven't been too helpful - it appears that there is a symbol that isn't
> available when linking.
>
> Job details (for example):
> https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/results/results-
> uploads/test_runs/2363efb43157465db3228c34c00ebd57/log_upload_file/20
> 21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip
>
> Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the compilation of
> SPDK? Maybe show the arguments to the compiler for the specific object?
> Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong?
>
> Thanks,
> -Aaron
From: Brandon Lo <hidden> Date: 2021-02-09 16:07:49
Hi everyone,
I will adjust the branches and watch over the first few pipelines to
make sure everything goes smoothly.
Thanks for the update,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:13 AM Aaron Conole [off-list ref] wrote:
"Zawadzki, Tomasz" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Lincoln,
That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x.
Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even from a few
hours ago). I suppose the lab side might need some adjustment, too?
quoted
The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if
this is what you are seeing on your end too.
Thanks,
Tomek
From: Lincoln Lavoie <redacted>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM
To: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; Brandon Lo <redacted>; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
Thanks Tomek,
Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make sure the next set of builds pass or see what the next failure
is. :-P
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Aaron,
Thank you for reporting this !
This is an issue with rte_power now depending on rte_ethdev, which was resolved on latest SPDK.
I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK branch for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK
release, would be v21.01.x:
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x
The fix has been backported to that branch and should be merged shortly:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320
Thanks,
Tomek
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [off-list ref] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole
> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM
> To: Brandon Lo [off-list ref]
> Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
>
> Greetings,
>
> I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation in the UNH community lab seems
> to be failing, and I don't see an obvious reason for the failure.
> The logs haven't been too helpful - it appears that there is a symbol that isn't
> available when linking.
>
> Job details (for example):
> https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/results/results-
> uploads/test_runs/2363efb43157465db3228c34c00ebd57/log_upload_file/20
> 21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip
>
> Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the compilation of
> SPDK? Maybe show the arguments to the compiler for the specific object?
> Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong?
>
> Thanks,
> -Aaron
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
From: Brandon Lo <hidden> Date: 2021-02-09 17:55:20
Hi again everyone,
I have checked the pipelines with SPDK branch v21.01.x on the main DPDK branch.
It still seems to have an issue with compilation, and I have attached
a log of a Fedora SPDK compilation.
There are some undefined references to "rte_ether_unformat_addr"
I will continue to look into this. If you have any ideas on how to fix
this, please let me know.
Thanks,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:07 AM Brandon Lo [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi everyone,
I will adjust the branches and watch over the first few pipelines to
make sure everything goes smoothly.
Thanks for the update,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:13 AM Aaron Conole [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
"Zawadzki, Tomasz" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Lincoln,
That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x.
Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even from a few
hours ago). I suppose the lab side might need some adjustment, too?
quoted
The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if
this is what you are seeing on your end too.
Thanks,
Tomek
From: Lincoln Lavoie <redacted>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM
To: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; Brandon Lo <redacted>; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
Thanks Tomek,
Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make sure the next set of builds pass or see what the next failure
is. :-P
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Aaron,
Thank you for reporting this !
This is an issue with rte_power now depending on rte_ethdev, which was resolved on latest SPDK.
I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK branch for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK
release, would be v21.01.x:
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x
The fix has been backported to that branch and should be merged shortly:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320
Thanks,
Tomek
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [off-list ref] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole
> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM
> To: Brandon Lo [off-list ref]
> Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
>
> Greetings,
>
> I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation in the UNH community lab seems
> to be failing, and I don't see an obvious reason for the failure.
> The logs haven't been too helpful - it appears that there is a symbol that isn't
> available when linking.
>
> Job details (for example):
> https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/results/results-
> uploads/test_runs/2363efb43157465db3228c34c00ebd57/log_upload_file/20
> 21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip
>
> Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the compilation of
> SPDK? Maybe show the arguments to the compiler for the specific object?
> Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong?
>
> Thanks,
> -Aaron
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
Hi again everyone,
I have checked the pipelines with SPDK branch v21.01.x on the main DPDK branch.
It still seems to have an issue with compilation, and I have attached
a log of a Fedora SPDK compilation.
There are some undefined references to "rte_ether_unformat_addr"
I will continue to look into this. If you have any ideas on how to fix
this, please let me know.
Looks like rte_ethdev depends on rte_net - maybe I missed something.
Brandon, can we disable this test for the time being since it's been
failing for a while now? Can you also send me the container image /
definitions you're using so that I can help work on this?
Thanks,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:07 AM Brandon Lo [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hi everyone,
I will adjust the branches and watch over the first few pipelines to
make sure everything goes smoothly.
Thanks for the update,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:13 AM Aaron Conole [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
"Zawadzki, Tomasz" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Lincoln,
That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x.
Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even from a few
hours ago). I suppose the lab side might need some adjustment, too?
quoted
The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against
dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if
this is what you are seeing on your end too.
Thanks,
Tomek
From: Lincoln Lavoie <redacted>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM
To: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; Brandon Lo
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
Thanks Tomek,
Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make sure
the next set of builds pass or see what the next failure
is. :-P
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Aaron,
Thank you for reporting this !
This is an issue with rte_power now depending on rte_ethdev, which was resolved on latest SPDK.
I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK
branch for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK
release, would be v21.01.x:
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x
The fix has been backported to that branch and should be merged shortly:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320
Thanks,
Tomek
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [off-list ref] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole
> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM
> To: Brandon Lo [off-list ref]
> Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
>
> Greetings,
>
> I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation in the UNH community lab seems
> to be failing, and I don't see an obvious reason for the failure.
> The logs haven't been too helpful - it appears that there is a symbol that isn't
> available when linking.
>
> Job details (for example):
> https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/results/results-
> uploads/test_runs/2363efb43157465db3228c34c00ebd57/log_upload_file/20
> 21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip
>
> Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the compilation of
> SPDK? Maybe show the arguments to the compiler for the specific object?
> Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong?
>
> Thanks,
> -Aaron
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
From: Brandon Lo <hidden> Date: 2021-02-11 16:25:51
Hi Aaron,
I have disabled the pipeline. Here is the bug ticket so that we can
keep track of the status: https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=637
Attached is the dockerfile and the script that it uses to run SPDK compilation.
Thanks,
Brandon
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 9:02 AM Aaron Conole [off-list ref] wrote:
Brandon Lo [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi again everyone,
I have checked the pipelines with SPDK branch v21.01.x on the main DPDK branch.
It still seems to have an issue with compilation, and I have attached
a log of a Fedora SPDK compilation.
There are some undefined references to "rte_ether_unformat_addr"
I will continue to look into this. If you have any ideas on how to fix
this, please let me know.
Looks like rte_ethdev depends on rte_net - maybe I missed something.
Brandon, can we disable this test for the time being since it's been
failing for a while now? Can you also send me the container image /
definitions you're using so that I can help work on this?
quoted
Thanks,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:07 AM Brandon Lo [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hi everyone,
I will adjust the branches and watch over the first few pipelines to
make sure everything goes smoothly.
Thanks for the update,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:13 AM Aaron Conole [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
"Zawadzki, Tomasz" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Lincoln,
That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x.
Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even from a few
hours ago). I suppose the lab side might need some adjustment, too?
quoted
The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against
dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if
this is what you are seeing on your end too.
Thanks,
Tomek
From: Lincoln Lavoie <redacted>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM
To: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; Brandon Lo
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
Thanks Tomek,
Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make sure
the next set of builds pass or see what the next failure
is. :-P
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Aaron,
Thank you for reporting this !
This is an issue with rte_power now depending on rte_ethdev, which was resolved on latest SPDK.
I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK
branch for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK
release, would be v21.01.x:
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x
The fix has been backported to that branch and should be merged shortly:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320
Thanks,
Tomek
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [off-list ref] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole
> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM
> To: Brandon Lo [off-list ref]
> Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
>
> Greetings,
>
> I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation in the UNH community lab seems
> to be failing, and I don't see an obvious reason for the failure.
> The logs haven't been too helpful - it appears that there is a symbol that isn't
> available when linking.
>
> Job details (for example):
> https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/results/results-
> uploads/test_runs/2363efb43157465db3228c34c00ebd57/log_upload_file/20
> 21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip
>
> Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the compilation of
> SPDK? Maybe show the arguments to the compiler for the specific object?
> Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong?
>
> Thanks,
> -Aaron
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
From: Zawadzki, Tomasz <hidden> Date: 2021-02-12 09:18:13
Hi,
As Aaron noted this was result of rte_ethdev depending on rte_net.
On SPDK side rte_net was included in default compilation with vhost component, but since vhost is disabled in the UNH lab tests with SPDK it showed up as missing. A fix for that is now submitted to SPDK:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6398
I'll let you know when it makes it's way to the v21.01.x branch.
@Brandon Lo General question, is there particular reason to disable vhost [configure argument '--without-vhost'] in the UNH lab tests with SPDK ?
I don't recall any identified issue and enabling it would increase the coverage of the compilation tests.
Thanks,
Tomek
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 3:02 PM
To: Brandon Lo <redacted>
Cc: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>; Lincoln Lavoie
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org;
spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures
@ DPDK community lab
Brandon Lo [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi again everyone,
I have checked the pipelines with SPDK branch v21.01.x on the main DPDK
branch.
quoted
It still seems to have an issue with compilation, and I have attached
a log of a Fedora SPDK compilation.
There are some undefined references to "rte_ether_unformat_addr"
I will continue to look into this. If you have any ideas on how to fix
this, please let me know.
Looks like rte_ethdev depends on rte_net - maybe I missed something.
Brandon, can we disable this test for the time being since it's been failing for
a while now? Can you also send me the container image / definitions you're
using so that I can help work on this?
quoted
Thanks,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:07 AM Brandon Lo [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hi everyone,
I will adjust the branches and watch over the first few pipelines to
make sure everything goes smoothly.
Thanks for the update,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:13 AM Aaron Conole [off-list ref]
wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
"Zawadzki, Tomasz" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Lincoln,
That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x.
Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even from a
few hours ago). I suppose the lab side might need some adjustment,
too?
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against
dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if this
is what you are seeing on your end too.
Thanks,
Tomek
From: Lincoln Lavoie <redacted>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM
To: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; Brandon Lo
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures
@ DPDK community lab
Thanks Tomek,
Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make sure
the next set of builds pass or see what the next failure is. :-P
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Hi Aaron,
Thank you for reporting this !
This is an issue with rte_power now depending on rte_ethdev, which
was resolved on latest SPDK.
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK branch
for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK release,
would be v21.01.x:
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x
The fix has been backported to that branch and should be merged
shortly:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320
Thanks,
Tomek
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [off-list ref] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole >
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM > To: Brandon Lo
[off-list ref] > Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK
compilation failures @ DPDK community lab > > Greetings, > >
I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation in the UNH community
lab seems > to be failing, and I don't see an obvious reason for the
e/20 > 21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip
>
> Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the
compilation of > SPDK? Maybe show the arguments to the compiler
for the specific object?
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
> Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong?
>
> Thanks,
> -Aaron
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
From: Brandon Lo <hidden> Date: 2021-02-12 17:40:03
Hi Tomek,
I do not think we have a specific reason for disabling vhost. I can
look into enabling it and get back to you on that.
Thanks,
Brandon
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 4:18 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
[off-list ref] wrote:
Hi,
As Aaron noted this was result of rte_ethdev depending on rte_net.
On SPDK side rte_net was included in default compilation with vhost component, but since vhost is disabled in the UNH lab tests with SPDK it showed up as missing. A fix for that is now submitted to SPDK:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6398
I'll let you know when it makes it's way to the v21.01.x branch.
@Brandon Lo General question, is there particular reason to disable vhost [configure argument '--without-vhost'] in the UNH lab tests with SPDK ?
I don't recall any identified issue and enabling it would increase the coverage of the compilation tests.
Thanks,
Tomek
quoted
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 3:02 PM
To: Brandon Lo <redacted>
Cc: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>; Lincoln Lavoie
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org;
spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures
@ DPDK community lab
Brandon Lo [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi again everyone,
I have checked the pipelines with SPDK branch v21.01.x on the main DPDK
branch.
quoted
It still seems to have an issue with compilation, and I have attached
a log of a Fedora SPDK compilation.
There are some undefined references to "rte_ether_unformat_addr"
I will continue to look into this. If you have any ideas on how to fix
this, please let me know.
Looks like rte_ethdev depends on rte_net - maybe I missed something.
Brandon, can we disable this test for the time being since it's been failing for
a while now? Can you also send me the container image / definitions you're
using so that I can help work on this?
quoted
Thanks,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:07 AM Brandon Lo [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hi everyone,
I will adjust the branches and watch over the first few pipelines to
make sure everything goes smoothly.
Thanks for the update,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:13 AM Aaron Conole [off-list ref]
wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
"Zawadzki, Tomasz" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Lincoln,
That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x.
Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even from a
few hours ago). I suppose the lab side might need some adjustment,
too?
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against
dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if this
is what you are seeing on your end too.
Thanks,
Tomek
From: Lincoln Lavoie <redacted>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM
To: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; Brandon Lo
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures
@ DPDK community lab
Thanks Tomek,
Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make sure
the next set of builds pass or see what the next failure is. :-P
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Hi Aaron,
Thank you for reporting this !
This is an issue with rte_power now depending on rte_ethdev, which
was resolved on latest SPDK.
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK branch
for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK release,
would be v21.01.x:
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x
The fix has been backported to that branch and should be merged
shortly:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320
Thanks,
Tomek
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [off-list ref] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole >
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM > To: Brandon Lo
[off-list ref] > Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK
compilation failures @ DPDK community lab > > Greetings, > >
I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation in the UNH community
lab seems > to be failing, and I don't see an obvious reason for the
e/20 > 21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip
>
> Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the
compilation of > SPDK? Maybe show the arguments to the compiler
for the specific object?
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
> Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong?
>
> Thanks,
> -Aaron
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
From: David Marchand <hidden> Date: 2021-02-15 09:12:24
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 10:18 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
[off-list ref] wrote:
On SPDK side rte_net was included in default compilation with vhost component, but since vhost is disabled in the UNH lab tests with SPDK it showed up as missing. A fix for that is now submitted to SPDK:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6398
I'll let you know when it makes it's way to the v21.01.x branch.
Rather than maintain dpdk internal dependencies on SPDK side, would it
be possible to use pkg-config?
--
David Marchand
From: Nick Connolly <hidden> Date: 2021-02-15 09:56:17
Rather than maintain dpdk internal dependencies on SPDK side, would it
be possible to use pkg-config?
Hi David,
Are the DPDK pkgconfig files intended to work for Windows builds?
I've had a quick look and as far as I can see the dependencies are
listed correctly,
but I was less convinced by the use of -Wl,--whole-archive which is
specific to the
GNU linker (Clang/Link configuration requires a sequence of
-Wl,-wholearchive:<library>).
SPDK doesn't currently support Windows, but there is work in progress
(https://wpdk.github.io)
that can now natively attach an NVMe disk and serve storage from it.
Thanks,
Nick
From: David Marchand <hidden> Date: 2021-02-15 10:16:13
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 10:56 AM Nick Connolly
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Rather than maintain dpdk internal dependencies on SPDK side, would it
be possible to use pkg-config?
Hi David,
Are the DPDK pkgconfig files intended to work for Windows builds?
I cannot find a test linking an example for Windows out of meson.
I don't know what the best solution is for linking an application
against DPDK for Windows.
Cc'd dpdk windows maintainers.
I've had a quick look and as far as I can see the dependencies are
listed correctly,
but I was less convinced by the use of -Wl,--whole-archive which is
specific to the
GNU linker (Clang/Link configuration requires a sequence of
-Wl,-wholearchive:<library>).
One of the reasons is to avoid statically linked drivers being dropped
by the linker when no explicit reference exists.
--
David Marchand
Hi Tomek,
I do not think we have a specific reason for disabling vhost. I can
look into enabling it and get back to you on that.
I did a test, but I had to hack up the dockerfile and compile script a
bit.
I removed the '--without-vhost' (I also modified it to pull dpdk and
SPDK from their respective 'main'/'master' branches). The build
completed successfully.
I will update the BZ with this information. Can you try testing with
the '--without-vhost' removed from the compile_spdk.sh line, and if that
is successful we can modify the job and re-enable?
Thanks,
Brandon
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 4:18 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hi,
As Aaron noted this was result of rte_ethdev depending on rte_net.
On SPDK side rte_net was included in default compilation with vhost
component, but since vhost is disabled in the UNH lab tests with
SPDK it showed up as missing. A fix for that is now submitted to
SPDK:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6398
I'll let you know when it makes it's way to the v21.01.x branch.
@Brandon Lo General question, is there particular reason to disable
vhost [configure argument '--without-vhost'] in the UNH lab tests
with SPDK ?
I don't recall any identified issue and enabling it would increase
the coverage of the compilation tests.
Thanks,
Tomek
quoted
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 3:02 PM
To: Brandon Lo <redacted>
Cc: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>; Lincoln Lavoie
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org;
spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures
@ DPDK community lab
Brandon Lo [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi again everyone,
I have checked the pipelines with SPDK branch v21.01.x on the main DPDK
branch.
quoted
It still seems to have an issue with compilation, and I have attached
a log of a Fedora SPDK compilation.
There are some undefined references to "rte_ether_unformat_addr"
I will continue to look into this. If you have any ideas on how to fix
this, please let me know.
Looks like rte_ethdev depends on rte_net - maybe I missed something.
Brandon, can we disable this test for the time being since it's been failing for
a while now? Can you also send me the container image / definitions you're
using so that I can help work on this?
quoted
Thanks,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:07 AM Brandon Lo [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hi everyone,
I will adjust the branches and watch over the first few pipelines to
make sure everything goes smoothly.
Thanks for the update,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:13 AM Aaron Conole [off-list ref]
wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
"Zawadzki, Tomasz" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Lincoln,
That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x.
Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even from a
few hours ago). I suppose the lab side might need some adjustment,
too?
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against
dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if this
is what you are seeing on your end too.
Thanks,
Tomek
From: Lincoln Lavoie <redacted>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM
To: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; Brandon Lo
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures
@ DPDK community lab
Thanks Tomek,
Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make sure
the next set of builds pass or see what the next failure is. :-P
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Hi Aaron,
Thank you for reporting this !
This is an issue with rte_power now depending on rte_ethdev, which
was resolved on latest SPDK.
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK branch
for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK release,
would be v21.01.x:
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x
The fix has been backported to that branch and should be merged
shortly:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320
Thanks,
Tomek
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [off-list ref] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole >
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM > To: Brandon Lo
[off-list ref] > Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK
compilation failures @ DPDK community lab > > Greetings, > >
I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation in the UNH community
lab seems > to be failing, and I don't see an obvious reason for the
e/20 > 21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip
>
> Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the
compilation of > SPDK? Maybe show the arguments to the compiler
for the specific object?
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
> Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong?
>
> Thanks,
> -Aaron
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
From: Zawadzki, Tomasz <hidden> Date: 2021-02-17 16:06:51
Hi folks,
Patch in question is now part of v21.01.x branch and tests in UNH lab can make use of it.
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/commit/14eeeea669010247fa8d6c7ce53b2e69fcfaa858
If possible, removing '--without-vhost' would be best going forward. Then SPDK compilation tests would cover rte_vhost too.
Thanks,
Tomek
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 4:28 PM
To: Brandon Lo <redacted>
Cc: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>; Lincoln Lavoie
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org;
spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures
@ DPDK community lab
Brandon Lo [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Tomek,
I do not think we have a specific reason for disabling vhost. I can
look into enabling it and get back to you on that.
I did a test, but I had to hack up the dockerfile and compile script a bit.
I removed the '--without-vhost' (I also modified it to pull dpdk and SPDK from
their respective 'main'/'master' branches). The build completed successfully.
I will update the BZ with this information. Can you try testing with the '--
without-vhost' removed from the compile_spdk.sh line, and if that is
successful we can modify the job and re-enable?
quoted
Thanks,
Brandon
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 4:18 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hi,
As Aaron noted this was result of rte_ethdev depending on rte_net.
On SPDK side rte_net was included in default compilation with vhost
component, but since vhost is disabled in the UNH lab tests with SPDK
it showed up as missing. A fix for that is now submitted to
SPDK:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6398
I'll let you know when it makes it's way to the v21.01.x branch.
@Brandon Lo General question, is there particular reason to disable
vhost [configure argument '--without-vhost'] in the UNH lab tests
with SPDK ?
I don't recall any identified issue and enabling it would increase
the coverage of the compilation tests.
Thanks,
Tomek
quoted
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 3:02 PM
To: Brandon Lo <redacted>
Cc: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>; Lincoln Lavoie
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK
compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
Brandon Lo [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi again everyone,
I have checked the pipelines with SPDK branch v21.01.x on the
main DPDK
branch.
quoted
It still seems to have an issue with compilation, and I have
attached a log of a Fedora SPDK compilation.
There are some undefined references to "rte_ether_unformat_addr"
I will continue to look into this. If you have any ideas on how
to fix this, please let me know.
Looks like rte_ethdev depends on rte_net - maybe I missed something.
Brandon, can we disable this test for the time being since it's
been failing for a while now? Can you also send me the container
image / definitions you're using so that I can help work on this?
quoted
Thanks,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:07 AM Brandon Lo [off-list ref]
wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Hi everyone,
I will adjust the branches and watch over the first few
pipelines to make sure everything goes smoothly.
Thanks for the update,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:13 AM Aaron Conole
[off-list ref]
wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
"Zawadzki, Tomasz" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Lincoln,
That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x.
Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even
from a few hours ago). I suppose the lab side might need some
adjustment,
too?
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against
dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if
this is what you are seeing on your end too.
Thanks,
Tomek
From: Lincoln Lavoie <redacted>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM
To: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; Brandon Lo
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation
failures @ DPDK community lab
Thanks Tomek,
Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make
sure the next set of builds pass or see what the next
failure is. :-P
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Hi Aaron,
Thank you for reporting this !
This is an issue with rte_power now depending on
rte_ethdev, which
was resolved on latest SPDK.
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK
branch for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK
release, would be v21.01.x:
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x
The fix has been backported to that branch and should be
merged
shortly:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320
Thanks,
Tomek
> -----Original Message----- > From: dev
[off-list ref] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole >
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM > To: Brandon Lo
[off-list ref] > Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI]
SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab > >
Greetings, > > I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation
in the UNH community lab seems > to be failing, and I don't
see an obvious reason for the
e/20 >
21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip
>
> Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the
compilation of > SPDK? Maybe show the arguments to the
compiler
for the specific object?
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
> Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong?
>
> Thanks,
> -Aaron
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
From: Brandon Lo <hidden> Date: 2021-02-18 13:59:39
Hi Tomek,
We have enabled vhost again and it is now in production with passing
results as expected.
I have closed the bug ticket as well.
Thanks,
Brandon
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 11:06 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
[off-list ref] wrote:
Hi folks,
Patch in question is now part of v21.01.x branch and tests in UNH lab can make use of it.
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/commit/14eeeea669010247fa8d6c7ce53b2e69fcfaa858
If possible, removing '--without-vhost' would be best going forward. Then SPDK compilation tests would cover rte_vhost too.
Thanks,
Tomek
quoted
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 4:28 PM
To: Brandon Lo <redacted>
Cc: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>; Lincoln Lavoie
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org;
spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation failures
@ DPDK community lab
Brandon Lo [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Tomek,
I do not think we have a specific reason for disabling vhost. I can
look into enabling it and get back to you on that.
I did a test, but I had to hack up the dockerfile and compile script a bit.
I removed the '--without-vhost' (I also modified it to pull dpdk and SPDK from
their respective 'main'/'master' branches). The build completed successfully.
I will update the BZ with this information. Can you try testing with the '--
without-vhost' removed from the compile_spdk.sh line, and if that is
successful we can modify the job and re-enable?
quoted
Thanks,
Brandon
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 4:18 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hi,
As Aaron noted this was result of rte_ethdev depending on rte_net.
On SPDK side rte_net was included in default compilation with vhost
component, but since vhost is disabled in the UNH lab tests with SPDK
it showed up as missing. A fix for that is now submitted to
SPDK:
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6398
I'll let you know when it makes it's way to the v21.01.x branch.
@Brandon Lo General question, is there particular reason to disable
vhost [configure argument '--without-vhost'] in the UNH lab tests
with SPDK ?
I don't recall any identified issue and enabling it would increase
the coverage of the compilation tests.
Thanks,
Tomek
quoted
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 3:02 PM
To: Brandon Lo <redacted>
Cc: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>; Lincoln Lavoie
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdklab] Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK
compilation failures @ DPDK community lab
Brandon Lo [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi again everyone,
I have checked the pipelines with SPDK branch v21.01.x on the
main DPDK
branch.
quoted
It still seems to have an issue with compilation, and I have
attached a log of a Fedora SPDK compilation.
There are some undefined references to "rte_ether_unformat_addr"
I will continue to look into this. If you have any ideas on how
to fix this, please let me know.
Looks like rte_ethdev depends on rte_net - maybe I missed something.
Brandon, can we disable this test for the time being since it's
been failing for a while now? Can you also send me the container
image / definitions you're using so that I can help work on this?
quoted
Thanks,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:07 AM Brandon Lo [off-list ref]
wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Hi everyone,
I will adjust the branches and watch over the first few
pipelines to make sure everything goes smoothly.
Thanks for the update,
Brandon
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:13 AM Aaron Conole
[off-list ref]
wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
"Zawadzki, Tomasz" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Lincoln,
That patch in question is now merged to branch v21.01.x.
Good to know - I do still see a failure in the IOL job (even
from a few hours ago). I suppose the lab side might need some
adjustment,
too?
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
The builds performed for latest SPDK and SPDK LTS, against
dpdk-main branch seem to be passing. Would love to hear if
this is what you are seeing on your end too.
Thanks,
Tomek
From: Lincoln Lavoie <redacted>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:21 PM
To: Zawadzki, Tomasz <redacted>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; Brandon Lo
[off-list ref]; dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [CI] SPDK compilation
failures @ DPDK community lab
Thanks Tomek,
Can you let us know when the merge happens and we'll make
sure the next set of builds pass or see what the next
failure is. :-P
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:03 AM Zawadzki, Tomasz
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Hi Aaron,
Thank you for reporting this !
This is an issue with rte_power now depending on
rte_ethdev, which
was resolved on latest SPDK.
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
I believe that UNH lab verifies DPDK patches against SPDK
branch for latest release. Which after the very recent SPDK
release, would be v21.01.x:
https://github.com/spdk/spdk/tree/v21.01.x
The fix has been backported to that branch and should be
merged
shortly:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/6320
Thanks,
Tomek
> -----Original Message----- > From: dev
[off-list ref] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole >
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:21 PM > To: Brandon Lo
[off-list ref] > Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu; ci@dpdk.org;
dev@dpdk.org; spdk@lists.01.org > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [CI]
SPDK compilation failures @ DPDK community lab > >
Greetings, > > I've noticed that recently SPDK compilation
in the UNH community lab seems > to be failing, and I don't
see an obvious reason for the
e/20 >
21/2/dpdk_f6f2d2240153_15524_2021-02-04_22-59-59_NA.zip
>
> Is it possible to turn on more verbose logging during the
compilation of > SPDK? Maybe show the arguments to the
compiler
for the specific object?
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
> Maybe the SPDK folks can see something obviously wrong?
>
> Thanks,
> -Aaron
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu
--
Brandon Lo
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
blo@iol.unh.edu
www.iol.unh.edu