I am wondering whether we have downgraded the machines to 5.10.0-20 kernel to get rid of the kernel bug which is known to cause issue in user processes at random - described in the cover letter here: https://lists.debian.org/debian-s390/2023/02/msg00019.html
The following patch fixes this issue: https://lists.debian.org/debian-s390/2023/02/msg00019.html The patch fixes the problem introduced in commit 75309018a24d ("s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL") Can we check if the patch solves any of the CI issues? -Dipak On 16.02.23 17:49, Paul Gevers wrote: > As you can see e.g. here [1,2] it comes and goes (albeit sometimes the > queue was empty). I don't think its very different, I just never got out > of the s390x host what I was expecting. Long time I blamed it on the > "stealing" that happens on a shared host, but I think there's more. > > https://ci.debian.net/munin/ci-worker-s390x-01/ci-worker-s390x-01/debci_packages_processed.html So a pet peeve of mine are unitless graphs. Can we please annotate what the unit is? If we're looking at "Packages processed by architecture"[1] (which again, isn't a workable unit), then we see that s390x does not have a bad average, nor an overly bad max - given that it's with one worker instead of like 14 for amd64 and 10 for arm64? The average/max for the week is double for amd64 vs. s390x, so what does the queue size mean? Is there still obsolete work in the queue as well or does every item have the same value? (There's no way right now it can catch up with that many items in the queue. Although that again depends on the unit...) Kind regards Philipp Kern [1] https://ci.debian.net/munin/debian.net/ci-master.debian.net/debci_total_packages_processed.html
