[ovs-dev] [PATCH] ovn: Fix the test failures in travis CI.

Ben Pfaff blp at ovn.org
Fri Jul 12 16:59:02 UTC 2019


On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 07:09:42PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 12.07.2019 19:06, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > On 11.07.2019 19:00, nusiddiq at redhat.com wrote:
> >> From: Numan Siddique <nusiddiq at redhat.com>
> >>
> >> After the commit [1], below test cases are failing repeatedly in travis CI.
> >>
> >> 2663: ovn -- 4 HV, 1 LS, 1 LR, packet test with HA distributed router gateway port FAILED (ovn.at:8597)
> >> 2664: ovn -- 4 HV, 3 LS, 2 LR, packet test with HA distributed router gateway port FAILED (ovn.at:8844)
> >> 2667: ovn -- vlan traffic for external network with distributed router gateway port FAILED (ovn.at:9580)
> >> 2691: ovn -- router - check packet length - icmp defrag FAILED (ovn.at:13624)
> >>
> >> With the commit [1], ovn-controller sends GARPs for the IPs of the distributed
> >> router ports. The failing tests did not handle the situation if multiple GARPs
> >> are sent. The failures are mostly timing related. This patch fixes these issues.
> >>
> >> [1] - d65586b6fa97 ("ovn: Send GARP for router port IPs of a router port connected to bridged logical switch")
> >>
> >> Fixes: d65586b6fa97 ("ovn: Send GARP for router port IPs of a router port connected to bridged logical switch")
> >> CC: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets at samsung.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Numan Siddique <nusiddiq at redhat.com>
> >> ---
> > 
> > Hi.
> > Thanks for working on this!
> > 
> > I can confirm that this patch fixes frequent TravisCI failures.
> > There are still some occasional failures of ovn tests, but it they was
> > always there. (OVN tests has some timing issues).
> > 
> > Tested-by: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets at samsung.com>
> > 
> > However, I see that some failures was resolved by just removing the
> > checks from tests. This somehow decreases the test coverage.
> > So, It'll be good to have review from someone more familiar with
> > these tests than me.
> > 
> > Ben, what do you think about this patch?
> 
> Oh. You just applied it. So, I assume, it's OK for you. =)

If there's a better way to do it, I'm all for it.


More information about the dev mailing list