This bug was fixed in the package systemd - 246.6-1ubuntu1.1

---------------
systemd (246.6-1ubuntu1.1) groovy; urgency=medium

  [ Dan Streetman ]
  * d/t/boot-smoke: update test to avoid false negatives
    (LP: #1892358)
    
https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu/+source/systemd/commit/?id=205c30ca53b0e421db28bb56afaf5f88650ce592
  * d/t/boot-and-services: remove unneeded test lines
    (LP: #1892358)
    
https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu/+source/systemd/commit/?id=71853082af4e668996db574915c5a156f9897fd3
  * d/t/systemd-fsckd: rewrite test to try to fix false negatives
    (LP: #1892358)
    
https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu/+source/systemd/commit/?id=6ae6be039ec582410769d2d6d131e12bdcd19a68
  * d/p/lp1905044-test-use-cap_last_cap-for-max-supported-cap-number-n.patch:
    test: use cap_last_cap() instead of capability_list_length()
    (LP: #1905044)
    
https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu/+source/systemd/commit/?id=84a4832f5f7d4f939c1c78c6be4c3f9e05cd7f59
  * 
d/p/lp1907306/0001-sd-dhcp-client-don-t-log-timeouts-if-already-expired.patch,
    d/p/lp1907306/0002-sd-dhcp-client-track-dhcp4-t1-t2-expire-times.patch,
    d/p/lp1907306/0003-sd-dhcp-client-add-RFC2131-retransmission-details.patch,
    d/p/lp1907306/0004-sd-dhcp-client-simplify-dhcp4-t1-t2-parsing.patch,
    
d/p/lp1907306/0005-sd-dhcp-client-correct-dhcpv4-renew-rebind-retransmi.patch,
    
d/p/lp1907306/0006-sd-dhcp-client-correct-retransmission-timeout-to-mat.patch,
    
d/p/lp1907306/0007-test-network-increase-wait_online-timeout-to-handle-.patch,
    
d/p/lp1907306/0008-sd-dhcp-client-fix-renew-rebind-timeout-calculation-.patch:
    Send correct number of dhcpv4 renew and rebind requests
    (LP: #1907306)
    
https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu/+source/systemd/commit/?id=0a96dc16ac00e90cd3904e6d490d676b9bb98f1f
  * d/p/lp1902960-udev-re-assign-ID_NET_DRIVER-ID_NET_LINK_FILE-ID_NET.patch:
    Run net_setup_link on 'change' uevents (LP: #1902960)
    
https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu/+source/systemd/commit/?id=7183e2ef4758ce47b152dec735e7d213d6003e37
  * d/t/root-unittests:
    Remove any corrupt journal files (LP: #1881947)
    
https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu/+source/systemd/commit/?id=3d0ea66f0db4a204759fa0005f6f27579ee4195a

  [ Balint Reczey ]
  * d/t/systemd-fsckd: Plymouth-start stays active in 20.10 and later
    (LP: #1908067)
    
https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu/+source/systemd/commit/?id=e3ddd09301c8bdaa59b4fe54d7906f609552370d

 -- Dan Streetman <ddstr...@canonical.com>  Wed, 06 Jan 2021 15:40:39
-0500

** Changed in: systemd (Ubuntu Groovy)
       Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1892358

Title:
  autopkgtest success rate dropped inhibiting proposed migration

Status in systemd package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in systemd source package in Bionic:
  Fix Released
Status in systemd source package in Focal:
  Fix Released
Status in systemd source package in Groovy:
  Fix Released

Bug description:
  [impact]

  autopkgtests are failing/flaky and prevent other packages from
  migrating to -updates

  [test case]

  check autopkgtest history

  [regression potential]

  in regard to the changed test cases, any regression would likely
  result in either an incorrectly passed test, or an incorrectly failed
  test.

  [scope]

  for systemd, this is needed for x, b, and f.

  tests in g appear to be mostly stable, but I've opened MR (linked from
  this bug) to update the tests there as well.

  i don't plan to update x, as it's reaching ESM in ~6 months, and
  backporting the test fixes is more work than just a simple code copy,
  since there are additional differences/changes needed in the older
  version of systemd (and python3). the failing/flaky tests in x have
  been like that forever, and people have just retried them; we can keep
  retrying them until x moves into ESM next year.

  [original description]

  Hi,
  we had such cases in the past like bug 1817721 for bionic and maybe bug 
1892130 is about the same as well. There were more but I didn't want to search 
for all of them - what I checked is that there are no open ones clearly 
pointing out the recent further drop in already flaky subtests.

  In particular the tests "tests-in-lxd" and "systemd-fsckd" were known
  to be flaky before, but got even worse.

  Here stats of the last 40 runs, it might be a coincidences that this
  is after 246-2ubuntu1 landed. Could as well be any other change

  groovy
    amd64
  tests-in-lxd                   (F 42% S  0% B 10% => P 45%/) 
FFFFBFFFFFFFB....FF.B.....F.....F...FBF
  build-login                    (F  0% S  0% B 10% => P 87%/) 
....B.......B.......B................B.
  unit-config                    (F  0% S  0% B 10% => P 87%/) 
....B.......B.......B................B.
  networkd-testpy                (F  0% S  0% B 10% => P 87%/) 
....B.......B.......B................B.
  boot-and-services              (F  0% S  0% B 10% => P 87%/) 
....B.......B.......B................B.
  boot-smoke                     (F  0% S  0% B 10% => P 87%/) 
....B.......B.......B................B.
  logind                         (F  0% S  0% B 10% => P 87%/) 
....B.......B.......B................B.
  storage                        (F  0% S  0% B 10% => P 87%/) 
....B.......B.......B................B.
  upstream                       (F 35% S  0% B 10% => P 52%/) 
..FFB.FFF.FFB....FF.B.....F.F..F....FBF
  udev                           (F  0% S  0% B 10% => P 87%/) 
....B.......B.......B................B.
  systemd-fsckd                  (F 37% S  0% B 10% => P 50%/) 
FFFFBFFFFFFFB.FF...FB.....F..........B.
  root-unittests                 (F  0% S  0% B 10% => P 87%/) 
....B.......B.......B................B.
    ppc64el
  tests-in-lxd                   (F 25% S  0% B  0% => P 75%/) 
FFFF....FF............FFF.....F.........
  systemd-fsckd                  (F 35% S  0% B  0% => P 65%/) 
FFFFFFF...FF........F....FF.F..F........
  root-unittests                 (F  2% S  0% B  0% => P 97%/) 
..............................F.........
    s390x
  tests-in-lxd                   (F 52% S  0% B  0% => P 47%/) 
FFFFFFF.FFFFFFF.FF.........FFFF...F.....
  timedated                      (F  2% S  0% B  0% => P 97%/) 
...........F............................
  upstream                       (F 17% S  0% B  0% => P 82%/) 
.....F......F.F.............FFF...F.....
  systemd-fsckd                  (F 32% S  0% B  0% => P 67%/) 
FFFFFFF..FF..F.................FF..F....
  root-unittests                 (F 10% S  0% B  0% => P 90%/) 
............................FFF...F.....
    arm64
  tests-in-lxd                   (F 40% S  0% B  2% => P 57%/) 
FFFFF.B...FFF.FF..F..F.........FFF.F....
  logind                         (F  2% S  0% B  2% => P 95%/) 
......B...................F.............
  upstream                       (F 22% S  0% B  2% => P 75%/) 
...F.FB.....F.F.............F..FFF.F....
  root-unittests                 (F 12% S  0% B  2% => P 85%/) 
......B.F...........F.F........F...F....

  (I'm sure LP will make this unreadable, but is is nice in monospace)

  Whatever the root cause is - the success rate of these has reduced so
  much that the (even formerly questionable) practice of retry-until-
  success won't work anymore.

  I have run the two tests in a local VM and systemd-fsckd works there
  while tests-in-lxd seems to trip over the old flaky fellow being
  "boot-and-services".

  We had the discussion in the past, but I think I need to again bring
  up the suggestion to skip "tests-in-lxd" and "systemd-fsckd" until
  they are on reasonable success rates.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/systemd/+bug/1892358/+subscriptions

-- 
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to     : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Reply via email to