On 21-01-2026 16:29, Richard Purdie wrote:
CAUTION: This email comes from a non Wind River email account!
Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know
the content is safe.
On Wed, 2026-01-21 at 09:14 +0000, Peter Marko via lists.openembedded.org wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <openembedded-
[email protected]> On Behalf Of Varatharajan, Deepesh via
lists.openembedded.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2026 8:55
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: [OE-core] [PATCH] rust: Drop oeqa-selftest-Increase-timeout-in-process-
sigpipe-ru.patch
From: Deepesh Varatharajan <[email protected]>
This patch was originally added to address a rare failure on the PPC
target observed in AB. Currently, we are no longer testing the PPC
target in OE-Core. Therefore, we can remove this local patch. We have
also verified PPC testing locally several times without this patch,
and the issue has not reoccurred.
Was this tested for 32-bit ppc on a build machine which was under some load?
I wouldn't like to play a remove/re-add game, flaky timing tests have tendency
to return.
It's rather trivial patch which should not be causing any maintenance effort.
Note that this architecture is not being tested on AB, so the commit message is
bit misleading (as it was not observed on Yocto AB).
Also not being tested in AB is not a good reason to remove something as users
are still using it (as a tier-2 feature).
Note that we're discussing some form of return of Yocto AB testing for 32-bit
PPC.
There is a bugzilla ticket number in there:
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15625
and that shows that it did happen on the yocto project autobuilder when
testing 32 bit PPC. The autobuilder would have been under load and this
happened in 2024 with this fix around a year ago.
I think Deepesh is right, we should see if upstream would be willing to
increase the timeout. Carrying patches like this with no hope of ever
removing them is something we have a natural pressure to try and avoid
it at all possible.
Hi Richard,
How we should proceed further on this? After our discussion, it stayed
in master-next
for a few weeks but has now been removed. Would it be okay if I resend
the patch
after rebasing it to the latest sources?
If the mentioned failure shows up again, I can open an upstream ticket and
follow up with the community. Please let me know what you suggest.
Regards,
Deepesh
Cheers,
Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#232842):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/232842
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/117378407/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
