From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com (mail-wm1-f65.google.com [209.85.128.65]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC02675260 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 07:34:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id a8-v6so2674173wmf.1 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 00:34:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ctw8XASpFJ47EYuqJpf//nXjYI07salBB6zTAuGcSk8=; b=fjZ9oS2ovtv4ZNbaVOYvEf3l8rRjroE/GL9m1Ibe3I5e8H/95dAYnkEywca2+3H0dJ BIFu/MVpFk9ZHJMCkdI3K9cb9uwJnh3SKYMG4nKB5CXBRbeYyQln+oAcWmEvZJQkFaTM MVCfzyncW5aGen12docxZOOjBOxqKqmFmJA4A= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ctw8XASpFJ47EYuqJpf//nXjYI07salBB6zTAuGcSk8=; b=n2aP5E1lNw3Eq68bIQy5cl4BmfoKzpaTW9vStp6jhBdpTpQcgLJnYCEg4q2z3daORM G5PK1M07cLGFrJ4Mm9NGdjBxBLDg6Xkaqay1RNQ4vouEo/sdzYogXcxOJlPGjEW6mOkZ +BW0h57myqZpmI2yKLCD+54XOcYO9P0WTMrcAdqVop7HLMqWeX77v10S9p9LMuLOzv/O TXLg9lmU5HK3LKrHF4rgcdeZfCCP/GRb2/RGz/2Mu/oHr5XT2HI+kpRG7UL0PMAvqmDJ LC9ym1VV1QSJB/tc79ki31/1Y8W/zl7Cwo5MFHSy1MXiTrQqenadpQ9aj94mdCVPT18j lfBg== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfoiHNX25cBfhchCsSy6GuoG/U4nn+UGODF+oevs/pubyrz/Y1uWH vg20IEQymnY25cuOQbycEqWO4A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV63nee0/49hTwUYpvE9xnkbLjvaa7HReKy3d07rCpqg7WXg2im+nIg7MRFrylNUSInx1jL9ldA== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:1694:: with SMTP id 142-v6mr3683039wmw.113.1539934468239; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 00:34:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hex (5751f4a1.skybroadband.com. [87.81.244.161]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r131-v6sm3697919wmb.32.2018.10.19.00.34.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 19 Oct 2018 00:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <87b2b6679d3ce495e99660d0978360fc01c65286.camel@linuxfoundation.org> From: richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org To: Randy MacLeod , Khem Raj Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 08:34:26 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <20181017022220.20841-1-Randy.MacLeod@windriver.com> <20181017022220.20841-2-Randy.MacLeod@windriver.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH] valgrind: update from 3.13.0 to 3.14.0 X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 07:34:28 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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