Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

DAOS-17007 ci: add weekly functional testing (#15726) #16023

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mlawsonca
Copy link
Collaborator

Adds weekly testing that performs build (el8 & el9), functional VM tests (el8 & el9), and MD on SSD functional hardware tests (el8)

Also improves fix for DAOS-16959 with one line change in junit.sh

Skip-func-hw-test-medium: true
Skip-func-hw-test-medium-verbs-provider: true
Skip-func-hw-test-large: true

Steps for the author:

  • Commit message follows the guidelines.
  • Appropriate Features or Test-tag pragmas were used.
  • Appropriate Functional Test Stages were run.
  • At least two positive code reviews including at least one code owner from each category referenced in the PR.
  • Testing is complete. If necessary, forced-landing label added and a reason added in a comment.

After all prior steps are complete:

  • Gatekeeper requested (daos-gatekeeper added as a reviewer).

adds weekly testing that performs build (el8 & el9), functional VM tests (el8 & el9),
and MD on SSD functional hardware tests (el8)

Also improves fix for DAOS-16959

Run-GHA: true
Skip-func-hw-test-medium: true
Skip-func-hw-test-medium-verbs-provider: true
Skip-func-hw-test-large: true

Signed-off-by: Margaret Lawson <mlawsonca@google.com>
@mlawsonca mlawsonca requested a review from a team as a code owner March 4, 2025 21:45
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Mar 4, 2025

Ticket title is 'Add weekly md-on-ssd testing to Google branch'
Status is 'In Progress'
Labels: 'google-cloud-daos,md_on_ssd'
https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/DAOS-17007

@daosbuild1
Copy link
Collaborator

Test stage NLT on EL 8.8 completed with status UNSTABLE. https://build.hpdd.intel.com/job/daos-stack/job/daos//view/change-requests/job/PR-16023/1/testReport/

@mlawsonca mlawsonca requested a review from a team as a code owner March 5, 2025 18:40
@mlawsonca mlawsonca force-pushed the mlawsonca/gcp_weekly_testing branch from 688386e to ecb4b9a Compare March 12, 2025 05:26
fail-fast: false
env:
ARTIFACTORY_URL: https://artifactory.dc.hpdd.intel.com/
DAOS_EMAIL: brian.murrell@intel.com
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you know if something will fail if this is not set? IMO it never should have been designed to take a hardcoded email

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

definitely shouldn't be brian

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the same as what is being used currently upstream - https://github.com/daos-stack/actions-lib/blob/master/.github/workflows/rpm-build.yml#L248

Suggestion for what I can use instead?

I think per here -

and here -
DEBEMAIL="$DAOS_EMAIL" DEBFULLNAME="$DAOS_FULLNAME" \
- that something needs to be set, but could be mistaken

DISTRO: ${{ matrix.distro }}
DISTRO_REPOS: disabled
DOCKER_BUILDKIT: 0
JENKINS_URL: https://build.hpdd.intel.com/
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is going to break soon as we're moving out of the intel space. FYI @JohnMalmberg

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there something else I can use instead?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we want to just make these GHA variables so it's only hardcoded in one place? Or as a commit pragma?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

They need to be GHA variables.

This was experimental code.

The self hosted runners are being shutdown at the old lab in one month if not sooner.
I do not know if they will be replaced at the new lab.

Yes they need to be GHA variables and there needs to be a way of getting variables from self hosted runners.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The self hosted runners will need to be replaced somewhere or we won't be able to land stuff and/or we will be throttled by GitHub.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can @jolivier23 create a google/2.6 weekly testing branch (e.g., weekly-g26-testing) so we can run this in Jenkins instead?

# TODO -- this should be on stable, backedup storage, not /scratch
# yamllint disable-line rule:line-length
REPO_PATH: /scratch/job_repos/daos-stack/job/daos/job/gcp-weekly-${{ github.run_id }}/
REPO_FILE_URL: https://artifactory.dc.hpdd.intel.com/artifactory/repo-files/
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will break soon

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we want to just make these GHA variables so it's only hardcoded in one place? Or as a commit pragma?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants