Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> writes: > 16/04/2020 13:00, Thomas Monjalon: >> Travis is not reliable for native Arm and PPC: >> https://travis-ci.community/t/disk-quota-exceeded-on-arm64/7619/6 >> >> In order to get reliable Travis reports, >> the use of Arm machines is removed until Travis fixes it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > > We managed without applying this patch. > > After one year passed, what is the situation today regarding Travis? > Can we rely on Travis service?
So far, yes. > For which workload? Which architecture? I think for all of them. Looking at even the failures which pop up for the latest patches, they seem like real failures. ex: https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493722400 https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493688879 https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493624012 https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/493611597 These are ABI, and doc failures - different arches, etc. Seems like it's quite usable. > Aaron, what do you recommend? I think we should drop this patch - Travis continues to be useful even for individual developers checking their own results. It seems the service works quite a bit better now for the project as well, thanks to Honnappa and other ARM folks for working with them.
