Re: [PATCH] valgrind: update from 3.13.0 to 3.14.0

[richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org]

On Thu, 2018-10-18 at 19:12 -0400, Randy MacLeod wrote:
> For v2 I'll fix the build for musl and
> remove that unused patch that patchworks pointed out.
> 
> All the glibc builds succeeded except for arm and mips64
> which were not supported by the recipe. I'll check on that
> with the new version of valgrind at some point, likely on
> master-wr-> 2.6.1.
> 
> 
> 
> Here is the pass rate compared to 2.6-M3 QA run:
> 
> Test run:       qa-3.13   vg-3.14   vg-3.13
> 
> Tests ran       558       547       538
> Passed          215       287       201
> Failed          343       260       337
> Passrate 	38.53     52.5      37.4
> Last Passrate   49.1

Thanks, that at least suggests we are probably better off upgrading and
we can do so based on real data! :)

> where:
>    qa-3.13 is from the 2.6-M3 QA report
>    vg-3.14 is this update and
>    vg-3.13 is with this update removed using poky at:
>       3b77e7b785 systemtap: Fix issues from 4.0 upgrade
> 
> So the ptest results really are better and they are even
> better than the last pass rate that QA reported.
> Nonetheless, a 52.5% pass rate isn't good enough so
> I'll work on that for master-wr with backports to 2.6.1.
> 
> ../Randy
> 
> 
> 
> Some notes and more raw data than presented above.
> 
> BTW, I allocated 4G RAM to the qemu machine
> after running with the default and seeing the OOM killer
> run many times. I wonder if the QA test doesn't allocate
> enough RAM to deal with valgrind's high overhead.

Ross' comments based on Maxin's work looking at valgrind ptest were
that the tests do end up OOM a lot and aren't particularly
stable/predictable. More investigation is clearly needed to understand
what is going on...

Cheers,

Richard