Can you disable posting of results directly from your Jenkins/Zuul setup and have a script that just checks the log file for special markers to determine if the vote should be FAILED/PASSED/SKIPPED? Another advantage of this approach is that it gives you an opportunity to detect when a job just failed to setup due to infrastructure reasons and trigger a recheck without ever first posting a failure to gerrit.
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Dane Leblanc (leblancd) <lebla...@cisco.com > wrote: > Thanks Edgar for updating the APIC status!!! > > Edgar and Kyle: *****PLEASE NOTE******!!!! I need your understanding and > advice on the following: > > We are still stuck with a problem stemming from a design limitation of > Jenkins that prevents us from being compliant with Neutron 3rd Party CI > requirements for our DFA CI. > > The issue is that Jenkins only allows our scripts to (programmatically) > return either Success or Fail. There is no option to return "Aborted", "Not > Tested", or "Skipped". > > Why does this matter? The DFA plugin is just being introduced, and initial > DFA-enabling change sets have not yet been merged. Therefore, all other > change sets will fail our Tempest tests, since they are not DFA-enabled. > > Similarly, we were recently blocked in our APIC CI with a critical bug, > causing all change sets without this fix to fail on our APIC testbed. > > In these cases, we would like to enter a "throttled" or "partially > blocked" mode, where we would skip testing on change sets we know will > fail, and (in an ideal world) signal this shortcoming to Gerrit e.g. by > returning a "Skipped" status. Unfortunately, this option is not available > in Jenkins scripts, as Jenkins is currently designed. The only options we > have available is "Success" or all "Fail", which are both misleading. We > would also incorrectly report success or fail on one of the following test > commits: > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114393/ > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/40296/ > > I've brought this issue up on the openstack-infra IRC, and jeblair > confirmed the Jenkins limitation, but asked me to get consensus from the > Neutron community as to this being a problem/requirement. I've also sent > out an e-mail on the Neutron ML trying to start a discussion on this > problem (no traction). I plan on bringing this up in the 3rd Party CI IRC > on Monday, assuming there is time permitted in the open discussion. > > I'm also investigating > > For the short term, I would like to propose the following: > * We bring this up on the 3rd Party CI IRC on Monday to get a solution or > workaround, if available. If a solution is available, let's consider > including that as a hint when we come up with CI requirements for handling > CIs bocked by some critical fix. > * I'm also looking into using a REST API to cancel a Jenkins job > programmatically. > * If no solution or workaround is available, we work with infra team or > with Jenkins team to create a solution. > * Until a solution is available, for plugins which are blocked by a > critical bug, we post a status/notes indicating the plugin's situation on > our 3rd party CI status wiki, e.g.: > > Vendor Plugin/Driver Name Contact Name > Status Notes > My Vendor Name My Plugin CI My Contact Person T > Throttled / Partially blocked / Awaiting Intial Commits > > The status/notes should be clear and understood by the Neutron team. The > console logs for change sets where the tests were skipped should also > contain a message that all testing is being skipped for that commit. > > Note that when the DFA initial commits are merged, then this issue would > go away for the DFA CI. However, this problem will reappear every time a > blocking critical bug shows up for a 3rd party CI setup, or a new plugin is > introduced and the hardware-enabling commits are not yet merged. (That is, > until we have a solution for the Jenkins limitation). > > Let me know what you think. > > Thanks, > Dane > > -----Original Message----- > From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.mag...@workday.com] > Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 1:57 PM > To: Dane Leblanc (leblancd); OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for > usage questions) > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are > required to be run > > Sorry my bad but I just changed. > > Edgar > > On 8/21/14, 2:13 PM, "Dane Leblanc (leblancd)" <lebla...@cisco.com> wrote: > > >Edgar: > > > >I'm still seeing the comment "Results are not accurate. Needs > >clarification..." > > > >Dane > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.mag...@workday.com] > >Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 2:58 PM > >To: Dane Leblanc (leblancd); OpenStack Development Mailing List (not > >for usage questions) > >Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are > >required to be run > > > >Dane, > > > >Wiki has been updated. > > > >Thanks, > > > >Edgar > > > >On 8/21/14, 7:57 AM, "Dane Leblanc (leblancd)" <lebla...@cisco.com> > wrote: > > > >>Edgar: > >> > >>The status on the wiki page says "Results are not accurate. Needs > >>clarification from Cisco". > >>Can you please tell me what we are missing? > >> > >>-Dane > >> > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Dane Leblanc (leblancd) > >>Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 3:05 PM > >>To: 'Edgar Magana'; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage > >>questions) > >>Subject: RE: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are > >>required to be run > >> > >>The APIC CI did run tests against that commit (after some queue latency): > >> > >>http://128.107.233.28:8080/job/apic/1860/ > >>http://cisco-neutron-ci.cisco.com/logs/apic/1860/ > >> > >>But the review comments never showed up on Gerrit. This seems to be an > >>intermittent quirk of Jenkins/Gerrit: We have 3 CIs triggered from > >>this Jenkins/Gerrit server. Whenever we disable another one of our > >>other Jenkins jobs (in this case, we disabled DFA for some rework), > >>the review comments sometimes stop showing up on Gerrit. > >> > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.mag...@workday.com] > >>Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 1:33 PM > >>To: Dane Leblanc (leblancd); OpenStack Development Mailing List (not > >>for usage questions) > >>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are > >>required to be run > >> > >>I was looking to one of the most recent Neutron commits: > >>https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115175/ > >> > >> > >>I could not find the APIC report. > >> > >>Edgar > >> > >>On 8/19/14, 9:48 AM, "Dane Leblanc (leblancd)" <lebla...@cisco.com> > >>wrote: > >> > >>>From which commit is it missing? > >>>https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114629/ > >>>https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114393/ > >>> > >>>-----Original Message----- > >>>From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.mag...@workday.com] > >>>Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 12:28 PM > >>>To: Dane Leblanc (leblancd); OpenStack Development Mailing List (not > >>>for usage questions) > >>>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are > >>>required to be run > >>> > >>>Dane, > >>> > >>>Are you sure about it? > >>>I just went to this commit and I could not find the APIC tests. > >>> > >>>Thanks, > >>> > >>>Edgar > >>> > >>>On 8/17/14, 8:47 PM, "Dane Leblanc (leblancd)" <lebla...@cisco.com> > >>>wrote: > >>> > >>>>Edgar: > >>>> > >>>>The Cisco APIC should be reporting results for both APIC-related and > >>>>non-APIC related changes now. > >>>>(See http://cisco-neutron-ci.cisco.com/logs/apic/1738/). > >>>> > >>>>Will you be updating the wiki page? > >>>> > >>>>-Dane > >>>> > >>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>From: Dane Leblanc (leblancd) > >>>>Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 8:18 PM > >>>>To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > >>>>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are > >>>>required to be run > >>>> > >>>>Also, you can add me as a contact person for the Cisco VPNaaS driver. > >>>> > >>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>From: Dane Leblanc (leblancd) > >>>>Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 8:14 PM > >>>>To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > >>>>Subject: RE: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are > >>>>required to be run > >>>> > >>>>Edgar: > >>>> > >>>>For the Notes for the Cisco APIC, can you change the comment > >>>>"results are fake" to something like "results are only valid for > >>>>APIC-related commits"? I think this more accurately represents our > >>>>current results (for reasons we chatted about on another thread). > >>>> > >>>>Thanks, > >>>>Dane > >>>> > >>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.mag...@workday.com] > >>>>Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 6:36 PM > >>>>To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > >>>>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] What tests are > >>>>required to be run > >>>>Importance: High > >>>> > >>>>Team, > >>>> > >>>>I did a quick audit on the Neutron CI. Very sad results. Only few > >>>>plugins and drivers are running properly and testing all Neutron > >>>>commits. > >>>>I created a report here: > >>>>https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron_Plugins_and_Drivers#Existing > >>>>_ > >>>>P > >>>>l > >>>>ugi > >>>>n > >>>>_and_Drivers > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>We will discuss the actions to take on the next Neutron IRC meeting. > >>>>So please, reach me out to clarify what is the status of your CI. > >>>>I had two commits to quickly verify the CI reliability: > >>>> > >>>>https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114393/ > >>>> > >>>>https://review.openstack.org/#/c/40296/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>I would expect all plugins and drivers passing on the first one and > >>>>failing for the second but I got so many surprises. > >>>> > >>>>Neutron code quality and reliability is a top priority, if you > >>>>ignore this report that plugin/driver will be candidate to be remove > >>>>from Neutron tree. > >>>> > >>>>Cheers, > >>>> > >>>>Edgar > >>>> > >>>>P.s. I hate to be the inquisitor hereŠ but someone has to do the > >>>>dirty job! > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>On 8/14/14, 8:30 AM, "Kyle Mestery" <mest...@mestery.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>Folks, I'm not sure if all CI accounts are running sufficient tests. > >>>>>Per the requirements wiki page here [1], everyone needs to be > >>>>>running more than just Tempest API tests, which I still see most > >>>>>neutron third-party CI setups doing. I'd like to ask everyone who > >>>>>operates a third-party CI account for Neutron to please look at the > >>>>>link below and make sure you are running appropriate tests. If you > >>>>>have questions, the weekly third-party meeting [2] is a great place > >>>>>to ask questions. > >>>>> > >>>>>Thanks, > >>>>>Kyle > >>>>> > >>>>>[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NeutronThirdPartyTesting > >>>>>[2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty > >>>>> > >>>>>_______________________________________________ > >>>>>OpenStack-dev mailing list > >>>>>OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >>>>>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>_______________________________________________ > >>>>OpenStack-dev mailing list > >>>>OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >>>>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >>>> > >>>>_______________________________________________ > >>>>OpenStack-dev mailing list > >>>>OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >>>>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >>> > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -- Kevin Benton
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
