From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5474ECCD192 for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2024 09:25:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sqqvS-0003bY-Nq; Wed, 18 Sep 2024 05:24:42 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sqqvN-0003at-OP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2024 05:24:37 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sqqvL-00043n-NK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2024 05:24:37 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1726651473; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=Iz67smzzOXZyMTU9nhdny5TDC7LdQBbHvNtUHEwpvv8=; b=YqfeLrjppdY6Gvuq8hGfsEMhBcJocUuuIfdzwRxXFjvbO7Bqt+FQ7ePR/FGVIYrgpQxSnE 50oYTr0Lv/x+bTtfCLmfZAmCBpg7jCWhGKizezoQAd5Z+oYx7BM5cGftPWh9K5z6bP7jQu HEEBfBw/wOPsm3ug5QJJrZBOh1EFP8g= Received: from mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-671-HpZYkV6TOHK-UOYg2yZW8Q-1; Wed, 18 Sep 2024 05:24:29 -0400 X-MC-Unique: HpZYkV6TOHK-UOYg2yZW8Q-1 Received: from mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 292F81944AA4; Wed, 18 Sep 2024 09:24:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.45.226.29]) by mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBC9E30001A1; Wed, 18 Sep 2024 09:24:25 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2024 11:24:22 +0200 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers , Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= , Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: flakiness on CI jobs run via k8s Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.12 (2023-09-09) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.4 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Tue, Sep 17, 2024 at 04:48:45PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > I notice that a lot of the CI job flakiness I'm seeing with main > CI runs involves jobs that are run via the k8s runners. Notably > cross-i686-tci and cross-i686-system and cross-i686-user are like this. > These jobs run with no flakiness that I've noticed when they're run > by an individual gitlab user (in which case they're not running on > k8s, I believe). So something seems to be up with the environment > we're using to run the jobs for the main CI. My impression is that > the time things take to run can be very variable, especially if the > CI job believes the reported number of CPUs and actually tries to run > 8 or 9 test cases in parallel. > > Any ideas what might be causing issues here, or config tweaks > we might be able to make to ensure that the environment reports > to the CI job a number of CPUs/etc that accurately reflects > the amount of resource it really has? Didn't we change the hosting for our k8s runners recently ? They were running on Azure, but I vaguely recall hearing that it was being switched again. Anyway, perhaps the cloud provider is over-committing the env such that we have excessive streal time and thus not getting the full power of the CPUs we expect. I know gitlab's own public runners will suffer from this periodically, due to the very cheap VMs they host on. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|