Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix nightly pr failures #4206

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 30, 2023
Merged

Conversation

pb8o
Copy link
Contributor

@pb8o pb8o commented Oct 29, 2023

Changes

PRs #4149 and #4188 had a few regressions bugs that were not reachable from the normal PR tests.

In addition, add a change so we only compile example binaries once, instead of once per worker. This avoids downloading and compiling code.

Reason

To make all pipelines pass.

License Acceptance

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under
the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. For more information on following
Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check
CONTRIBUTING.md.

PR Checklist

  • If a specific issue led to this PR, this PR closes the issue.
  • The description of changes is clear and encompassing.
  • Any required documentation changes (code and docs) are included in this PR.
  • API changes follow the Runbook for Firecracker API changes.
  • User-facing changes are mentioned in CHANGELOG.md.
  • All added/changed functionality is tested.
  • New TODOs link to an issue.
  • Commits meet contribution quality standards.

  • This functionality cannot be added in rust-vmm.

pb8o added 4 commits October 29, 2023 13:27
In ddd9836 a mistake was introduced for
`DEFAULT_G3_FEATURES_NO_SSBS_4_14`. Correct it here.

Fixes: ddd9836

Signed-off-by: Pablo Barbáchano <[email protected]>
Commit c44b0c6 was refactored in such a way that we could not find an
exception for custom CPU templates. It was probably not noticed since
the it requires a specific CPU in m5d.

Fixes: c44b0c6

Signed-off-by: Pablo Barbáchano <[email protected]>
We compile the UFFD and seccomp example programs as a session fixture.
If we run the tests in parallel, there is one session per worker and we
end up downloading and compiling the examples for each worker (worst
case).

Instead, use the same approach as the Firecracker and jailer binaries.

Signed-off-by: Pablo Barbáchano <[email protected]>
Currently the test fails when running it outside of a PR, because the
checker returns an exit code of 2.

Fixes: f79d301

Signed-off-by: Pablo Barbáchano <[email protected]>
@pb8o pb8o added Priority: High Indicates than an issue or pull request should be resolved ahead of issues or pull requests labelled Status: Awaiting author Indicates that an issue or pull request requires author action labels Oct 29, 2023
@pb8o pb8o self-assigned this Oct 29, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 29, 2023

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (b94c475) 82.93% compared to head (9ebada5) 82.93%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #4206   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.93%   82.93%           
=======================================
  Files         221      221           
  Lines       28231    28231           
=======================================
  Hits        23414    23414           
  Misses       4817     4817           
Flag Coverage Δ
4.14-c7g.metal 78.35% <ø> (ø)
4.14-m5d.metal 80.29% <ø> (ø)
4.14-m6a.metal 79.41% <ø> (ø)
4.14-m6g.metal 78.35% <ø> (ø)
4.14-m6i.metal 80.27% <ø> (ø)
5.10-c7g.metal 81.30% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m5d.metal 83.00% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m6a.metal 82.23% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m6g.metal 81.30% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m6i.metal 82.98% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-c7g.metal 81.30% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m5d.metal 82.99% <ø> (-0.03%) ⬇️
6.1-m6a.metal 82.23% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m6g.metal 81.30% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m6i.metal 82.99% <ø> (ø)
6.2-m5d.metal 82.99% <ø> (?)
6.2-m6g.metal 81.30% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

The test fails when not run as part of PR tests. The issue is that these
tests behave differently when running as part of a PR or independently.
This makes testing and troubleshooting more difficult.

Workaround the issue by changing the directory so the command runs at
the right place.

Fixes: 8297c8f

Signed-off-by: Pablo Barbáchano <[email protected]>
@pb8o pb8o added Status: Awaiting review Indicates that a pull request is ready to be reviewed and removed Status: Awaiting author Indicates that an issue or pull request requires author action labels Oct 30, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@bchalios bchalios left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it's important to answer @sudanl0's question regarding the workaround we use.

@bchalios bchalios merged commit 36c0de7 into firecracker-microvm:main Oct 30, 2023
6 checks passed
@pb8o pb8o deleted the fix-nightly-pr branch October 30, 2023 12:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Priority: High Indicates than an issue or pull request should be resolved ahead of issues or pull requests labelled Status: Awaiting review Indicates that a pull request is ready to be reviewed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants