Re: [PULL 00/21] Migration 20230428 patches

[Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>]

Lukas Straub <lukasstraub2@web.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 02 May 2023 12:39:12 +0200
> Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> [...]
>> 
>> my patches are only code movement and cleanups, so Lukas any clue?
>> 
>> Lukas, I am going to drop the compress code for now and pass the other
>> patches.  In the meanwhile, I am going to try to setup some machine
>> where I can run the upstream tests and see if I can reproduce there.
>> BTW, I would be happy if you double check that I did the rebase
>> correctly, they didn't apply correctly, but as said, the tests have been
>> running for two/three days on all my daily testing, so I thought that I
>> did the things correctly.

Hi

> Hi,
> I rebased the series here and got exactly the same files as in this
> pull request. And I can't reproduce these failures either.

Nice

> Maybe you can run the CI just on the newly added compress tests and see
> if it already blows up without the refactoring?

It does, I don't have to check O:-)

The initial reason that I did the compression code on top of multifd was
that I was not able to get the old compression code to run "reliabely"
on my testing.

> Anyway, this series is not so important anymore...

What about:
- I add the series as they are, because the code is better than what we
  have before (and being in a different file makes it easier to
  deprecate, not compile, ...)
- I just disable the tests until we find something that works.

Richard, Lukas?

Later, Juan.

>> Richard, once that we are here, one of the problem that we are having is
>> that the test is exiting with an abort, so we have no clue what is
>> happening.  Is there a way to get a backtrace, or at least the number
>> 
>> Later, Juan.
>>