Hello, Martin! btw, just curious, how is Apache Foundation (or you personally) interested in all that ? please do not blame me, I really like to know.
чт, 16 янв. 2020 г. в 12:32, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]>: > Hello HAProxy developers, > > At work we are going to use more and more ARM64 based servers and HAProxy > is one of the main products we rely on. > So I went checking whether HAProxy project has a CI environment for > testing on ARM architecture. > we are looking towards https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/multi-cpu-architectures > I've found this recent discussion: > https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg35302.html (I > didn't find a way how to continue on the same mail thread, so I'm starting > a new one. Apologies for that!). > I played with arm64 for a while, the issue I encountered is travis-ci cache key, i.e. we cache openssl builds between our builds. so travis used the same cache key for both amd64 and arm64 builds (this might have changed recently, I did not check yet) arm64 is in my queue (as well as recent s390x arch from travis), hope to get back to it within month or so. > From this discussion and from > https://github.com/haproxy/haproxy/blob/master/.travis.yml I understand > that there is no public CI in use (i.e. TravisCI or CirrusCI) but some of > the developers run some tests locally regularly. > it is not completely true. there's public CI. we do not use github PR machinery, so sometimes tests fail after push to master branch. it is considered as ok, failures are fixed pretty fast. for example, see https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg35910.html it was just perfect, failure detected using CI and fixed within few days. no customers affected. > I've forked the project and tested on TravisCI ( > https://travis-ci.org/martin-g/haproxy/builds) but unfortunately the > builds were not very stable: > 1) some tests fail sometimes. I guess it is because of some timing issues > For example: > - https://travis-ci.org/martin-g/haproxy/jobs/636745241 > - https://travis-ci.org/martin-g/haproxy/jobs/636750676 > - https://travis-ci.org/martin-g/haproxy/jobs/636763346 > that's very interesting. I'll have a look. > 2) There was some weird issue on testing with LibreSSL > The output redirect at > https://github.com/haproxy/haproxy/blob/bb9da0b8e23c46caab34fe6005b66fa8065fe3ac/.travis.yml#L96 > for > some reason got stuck the build. I've removed temporarily the output > redirects and then it passed. So, it looks like some issue with TravisCI > environment. > arm64 is slower, I guess we should add "*travis*_*wait* *30" *to build-ssl.sh script thank for the hint > > In addition I've run the build and tests on one of our machines and all > was OK! > > My question to you is: Are you happy with your current way of testing ARM > architectures or you want to add more ? > Here are some options: > 1) enable TravisCI > already done https://travis-ci.com/haproxy/haproxy > 2) my company is willing to donate an ARM64 based VM, if you are > interested. > I do not work at Haproxy Inc :) Willy ? > You will have a SSH access and a user with sudo permissions to install > anything that is needed. > The spec is aarch64 8 cores CPU 2GHz (Kunpeng), 16GB RAM, 500G disk space > and 5M network bandwidth. The OS could be any of CentOS 7.4/7.5/7.6, > EulerOS 2.8, Fedora 29, OpenSuse 15.0 and Ubuntu 16.04/18.04. > > In both cases it will be ARM64. From the earlier mail discussion I > understand you would prefer ARM32. > as for myself, I prefer both arm64 and arm32. however, both AMD64 and ARM64 are the same 64 bits. both of them are little-endian. but you mentioned at least 3 builds with ARM64 failing (we have those tests passing on AMD64)! > > Kind regards, > Martin >
