Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] rust: Drop oeqa-selftest-Increase-timeout-in-process-sigpipe-ru.patch

[Deepesh Varatharajan <deepesh.varatharajan@windriver.com>]

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: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org <openembedded-
>>> core@lists.openembedded.org> On Behalf Of Varatharajan, Deepesh via
>>> lists.openembedded.org
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2026 8:55
>>> To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>>> Cc: Sundeep.Kokkonda@windriver.com; Deepesh.Varatharajan@windriver.com
>>> Subject: [OE-core] [PATCH] rust: Drop oeqa-selftest-Increase-timeout-in-process-
>>> sigpipe-ru.patch
>>>
>>> From: Deepesh Varatharajan <Deepesh.Varatharajan@windriver.com>
>>>
>>> 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
>