On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 05:09:47PM -0800, Armando M. wrote: > Folks, > > We have some IPv6 related bugs [1,2,3] that have been lingering for some > time now. They have been hurting the gate (e.g. [4] the most recent > offending failure) and since it looks like they have been without owners > nor a plan of action for some time, I made the hard decision of skipping > them [5] ahead of the busy times ahead.
So TBH I don't think the failure rate for these tests are really at a point necessitating a skip: http://status.openstack.org/openstack-health/#/test/tempest.scenario.test_network_v6.TestGettingAddress.test_multi_prefix_slaac http://status.openstack.org/openstack-health/#/test/tempest.scenario.test_network_v6.TestGettingAddress.test_dualnet_dhcp6_stateless_from_os http://status.openstack.org/openstack-health/#/test/tempest.scenario.test_network_v6.TestGettingAddress.test_dhcp6_stateless_from_os (also just a cool side-note, you can see the very obvious performance regression caused by the keystonemiddleware release and when we excluded that version in requirements) Well, test_dualnet_dhcp6_stateless_from_os is kinda there with a ~10% failure rate, but the other 2 really aren't. I normally would be -1 on the skip patch because of that. We try to save the skips for cases where the bugs are really severe and preventing productivity at a large scale. But, in this case these ipv6 tests are kinda of out of place in tempest. Having all the permutations of possible ip allocation configurations always seemed a bit too heavy handed. These tests are also consistently in the top 10 slowest for a run. We really should have trimmed down this set a while ago so we're only have a single case in tempest. Neutron should own the other possible configurations as an in-tree test. Brian Haley has a patch up from Dec. that was trying to clean it up: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/239868/ We probably should revisit that soon, since quite clearly no one is looking at these right now. -Matt Treinish > > Now one might argue that skipping them is counterproductive because it may > allow other regressions to sneak in, but I am hoping that this > controversial action will indeed smoke out the right folks. > > Comments welcome. > > Regards, > Armando > > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1477192 > [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1509004 > [3] https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-gate/+bug/1540983 > [4] > http://logs.openstack.org/37/264937/5/gate/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full/afeaabd//logs/testr_results.html.gz > [5] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/275457/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev