From: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@gmx.de>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: Pull request for UEFI sub-system for efi-2020-10-rc1 (2)
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 06:32:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9b1ecf1c-49d3-4635-2c73-059704ef7f02@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <73df5ffe-99c6-f7e4-6be9-6afa7e20130d@gmx.de>
On 7/12/20 12:05 AM, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> On 7/11/20 2:16 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 09:00:16AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>>> On 7/10/20 8:09 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 06:12:02PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The following changes since commit 61608f395e7dcb2be6060407a72a1149b046430a:
>>>>>
>>>>> Merge branch '2020-07-08-misc-features-and-fixes' (2020-07-08 20:20:24
>>>>> -0400)
>>>>>
>>>>> are available in the Git repository at:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-efi.git efi-2020-10-rc1-2
>>>>>
>>>>> for you to fetch changes up to f4cef8e7585c268f05a8c39e368ca115c25e40d5:
>>>>>
>>>>> efi_selftest: adjust runtime test for variables (2020-07-09 12:08:41
>>>>> +0200)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> NAK. This is reliably failing here:
>>>> https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/jobs/122018
>>>>
>>>> I see it passed Azure, and hasn't run through Travis yet. Maybe it
>>>> needs to be run repeatedly to fail and we just got "lucky" ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hello Tom,
>>>
>>> you saw unreproducible results with multiple runs failing and one run
>>> succeeding. The reason is that when signing with sign-efi-sig-list in
>>> out Python tests without passing a timestamp two signatures may be in
>>> the same second or not.
>>>
>>> When using the signed files to set UEFI variables a variable can only be
>>> overwritten by a file with a newer timestamp. But without setting
>>> timestamps explicitly using parameter -t passed to sign-efi-sig-list we
>>> have no control.
>>>
>>> I already fixed this for some elder tests but missed to fix this for the
>>> merged patches from Takahiro.
>>
>> Ah, thanks for the explanation.
>>
>
> Hello Tom,
>
> what I still do not understand why tests are sometimes skipped and
> sometimes not for the same source code:
>
> https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/jobs/122018
> Commit 7068e523
>
> 140 test/py/tests/test_efi_secboot/test_authvar.py .....
> 141 test/py/tests/test_efi_secboot/test_signed.py .....F
> 142 test/py/tests/test_efi_secboot/test_unsigned.py ...
>
> https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-efi/-/jobs/122155
> Commit 7068e523
>
> 148 test/py/tests/test_efi_secboot/test_authvar.py sssss
> 149 test/py/tests/test_efi_secboot/test_signed.py ssssss
> 150 test/py/tests/test_efi_secboot/test_unsigned.py sss
>
> Both runs used the same Docker image
> trini/u-boot-gitlab-ci-runner:bionic-20200526-18Jun2020
>
> What influence have different versions of the Gitlab runner?
>
> gitlab-runner 13.1.1
> gitlab-runner 12.2.0
>
> Some of our tests create and delete files in /tmp. How are parallel jobs
> separated in Gitlab?
>
> Best regards
>
> Heinrich
>
This information I received on the #gitlab IRC channel:
Q:
When using Gitlab CI for building the U-Boot project many jobs run in
parallel. Some results are irreproducible. How are parallel jobs
separated in Gitlab. E.g. if parallel jobs write and delete files in
/tmp are these in separate Docker containers or are they in the same
Docker container accessing the same directory?
A:
Yes, each job is a distinct docker container on a transient VM . Nothing
is shared unless you use the https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/yaml/#cache
capability, but that wouldn't help for parallel jobs. At least: on
gitlab.com, that's how it's implemented. On self-managed: depends a
little on how you choose to operate your runners (e.g. shell-executor vs
docker etc).
Best regards
Heinrich
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-12 4:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-09 16:12 Pull request for UEFI sub-system for efi-2020-10-rc1 (2) Heinrich Schuchardt
2020-07-10 18:09 ` Tom Rini
2020-07-11 7:00 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2020-07-11 12:16 ` Tom Rini
2020-07-11 22:05 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2020-07-12 4:32 ` Heinrich Schuchardt [this message]
2020-07-12 23:19 ` AKASHI Takahiro
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9b1ecf1c-49d3-4635-2c73-059704ef7f02@gmx.de \
--to=xypron.glpk@gmx.de \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.