[openib-general] nightly osm_sim report 2006-12-14:normal completion

[Eitan Zahavi]

Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> Hi Eitan,
>
> On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 02:11, Eitan Zahavi wrote:
>   
>> OSM Simulation Regression Summary
>> OpenSM rev = ____  
>> ibutils rev = ____  
>> Total=264 Pass=261 Fail=3
>>
>> Pass:
>> 36 Stability IS1-16.topo
>> 36 Pkey IS1-16.topo
>> 36 Multicast IS1-16.topo
>> 36 LidMgr IS1-16.topo
>> 35 OsmStress IS1-16.topo
>> 12 Stability IS3-loop.topo
>> 12 Stability IS3-128.topo
>> 12 Pkey IS3-128.topo
>> 12 OsmStress IS3-128.topo
>> 12 Multicast IS3-loop.topo
>> 11 Multicast IS3-128.topo
>> 11 LidMgr IS3-128.topo
>>
>> Failures:
>> 1 OsmStress IS1-16.topo
>> 1 Multicast IS3-128.topo
>> 1 LidMgr IS3-128.topo
>>     
>
> There are now 2 more failures. You had previously explained OsmStress
> failure as needing more investigation. Now there is a Multicast and
> LidMgr failure yet nothing really changed since the previous run the
> night before. Are these new tests ? What were the failures ?
>   
The tests use random seeds and thus can catch other bugs in each run.
I am investigating these failures. Some might be due to bugs in the 
checker code too.

Please pay attention the failure rate is low (LidMgr pass 36+11 runs 
failed 1 test).
This to imply the bug is a hard to find one.
> The repetitions have also been reduced from previous reports. Are these
> the same or different tests ?
>   
Number of repetitions depends on runtime. The regression started later 
thus run less iterations.
I run the "same" tests ("same" means same code not same random sequence).
> -- Hal
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openib-general mailing list
> openib-general at openib.org
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
>
> To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
>