CI status

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
30 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

CI status

Nicolas Cellier
 
Hi all,
I have restored (I think) the green status of minheadless build.
We could eventually authorize failure of all those builds, or restrict the number of flavours that we build (it takes really loooong time before we get CI feedback).
But if we abandon all those now, I fear that we never catch up; it's a one way ticket. IMO there are still interesting ideas to take, even if development has continued in Pharo fork...

Now the next failing build on travis is about squeak.cog.v3. Did some incompatible VM change took place?


######################################################
# Squeak-4.6 on Travis CI (2278.23) #
# 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s #
######################################################
#########################
# 5 tests did not pass: #
#########################
SUnitToolBuilderTests
837fef_266b
✗ #testHandlingNotification (10023ms)
TestValueWithinFix
2a65cb_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingBasic (1005ms)
e9a7ab_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedInner (1001ms)
c57415_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter (1002ms)
e89da3_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingRepeat (3004ms)
Executed 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s.
To reproduce the failed build locally, download smalltalkCI, and try to run something like:
bin/smalltalkci -s Squeak-4.6 --headfull /path/to/.smalltalk.ston
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Eliot Miranda-2
 
Hi Nicolas,

On Oct 26, 2020, at 6:59 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:


Hi all,
I have restored (I think) the green status of minheadless build.

Thank you so much!

We could eventually authorize failure of all those builds, or restrict the number of flavours that we build (it takes really loooong time before we get CI feedback).
But if we abandon all those now, I fear that we never catch up; it's a one way ticket. IMO there are still interesting ideas to take, even if development has continued in Pharo fork...

One approach might be to split them into “essential” and “nice to have” so we get faster feedback from the “essential” set.

Now the next failing build on travis is about squeak.cog.v3. Did some incompatible VM change took place?


######################################################
# Squeak-4.6 on Travis CI (2278.23) #
# 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s #
######################################################
#########################
# 5 tests did not pass: #
#########################
SUnitToolBuilderTests
837fef_266b
✗ #testHandlingNotification (10023ms)
TestValueWithinFix
2a65cb_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingBasic (1005ms)
e9a7ab_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedInner (1001ms)
c57415_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter (1002ms)
e89da3_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingRepeat (3004ms)
Executed 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s.
To reproduce the failed build locally, download smalltalkCI, and try to run something like:
bin/smalltalkci -s Squeak-4.6 --headfull /path/to/.smalltalk.ston
Could these test failures be nothing to do with the VM but instead to do with the (growing) divergence between trunk/spur and Squeak 4.6?

_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Nicolas Cellier
 


Le lun. 26 oct. 2020 à 15:11, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 
Hi Nicolas,

On Oct 26, 2020, at 6:59 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:


Hi all,
I have restored (I think) the green status of minheadless build.

Thank you so much!

We could eventually authorize failure of all those builds, or restrict the number of flavours that we build (it takes really loooong time before we get CI feedback).
But if we abandon all those now, I fear that we never catch up; it's a one way ticket. IMO there are still interesting ideas to take, even if development has continued in Pharo fork...

One approach might be to split them into “essential” and “nice to have” so we get faster feedback from the “essential” set.

+1, but I do not know how to configure the CI like that...
Now the next failing build on travis is about squeak.cog.v3. Did some incompatible VM change took place?


######################################################
# Squeak-4.6 on Travis CI (2278.23) #
# 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s #
######################################################
#########################
# 5 tests did not pass: #
#########################
SUnitToolBuilderTests
837fef_266b
✗ #testHandlingNotification (10023ms)
TestValueWithinFix
2a65cb_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingBasic (1005ms)
e9a7ab_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedInner (1001ms)
c57415_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter (1002ms)
e89da3_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingRepeat (3004ms)
Executed 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s.
To reproduce the failed build locally, download smalltalkCI, and try to run something like:
bin/smalltalkci -s Squeak-4.6 --headfull /path/to/.smalltalk.ston
Could these test failures be nothing to do with the VM but instead to do with the (growing) divergence between trunk/spur and Squeak 4.6?

_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)
No idea...
I've downloaded a Squeak4.6-15102.image, compiled a squeak.cog.v3 on windows10, and the test pass...
I will retry on other OSes this evening (the test fails on linux...).
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

David T. Lewis
 
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 03:22:39PM +0100, Nicolas Cellier wrote:

>  
> Le lun. 26 oct. 2020 ?? 15:11, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a
> ??crit :
>
> >
> > Hi Nicolas,
> >
> > On Oct 26, 2020, at 6:59 AM, Nicolas Cellier <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > ???
> > Hi all,
> > I have restored (I think) the green status of minheadless build.
> >
> >
> > Thank you so much!
> >
> > We could eventually authorize failure of all those builds, or restrict the
> > number of flavours that we build (it takes really loooong time before we
> > get CI feedback).
> > But if we abandon all those now, I fear that we never catch up; it's a one
> > way ticket. IMO there are still interesting ideas to take, even if
> > development has continued in Pharo fork...
> >
> >
> > One approach might be to split them into ???essential??? and ???nice to have??? so
> > we get faster feedback from the ???essential??? set.
> >
> > +1, but I do not know how to configure the CI like that...
>
> > Now the next failing build on travis is about squeak.cog.v3. Did some
> > incompatible VM change took place?
> >
> > For example
> > https://travis-ci.org/github/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/jobs/738831149
> >
> > ######################################################
> >
> > # Squeak-4.6 on Travis CI (2278.23)                  #
> >
> > # 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s #
> >
> > ######################################################
> >
> > #########################
> >
> > # 5 tests did not pass: #
> >
> > #########################
> >
> > SUnitToolBuilderTests
> > 837fef_266b
> >
> >  ??? #testHandlingNotification (10023ms)
> >
> > TestValueWithinFix
> > 2a65cb_266b
> >
> >  ??? #testValueWithinTimingBasic (1005ms)
> > e9a7ab_266b
> >
> >  ??? #testValueWithinTimingNestedInner (1001ms)
> > c57415_266b
> >
> >  ??? #testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter (1002ms)
> > e89da3_266b
> >
> >  ??? #testValueWithinTimingRepeat (3004ms)
> >
> >   Executed 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s.
> >
> > To reproduce the failed build locally, download smalltalkCI, and try to run something like:
> >
> > bin/smalltalkci -s Squeak-4.6 --headfull /path/to/.smalltalk.ston
> >
> > Could these test failures be nothing to do with the VM but instead to do
> > with the (growing) divergence between trunk/spur and Squeak 4.6?
> >
> > _,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)
> >
> No idea...
> I've downloaded a Squeak4.6-15102.image, compiled a squeak.cog.v3 on
> windows10, and the test pass...
> I will retry on other OSes this evening (the test fails on linux...).

I do not know if it is related to the CI issues, but here is one clue:

I am maintaining a V3 "trunk" image that attempts to keep in sync with
trunk except for changes that pertain to Spur object format (immediate
characters, etc). As of Monticello-ul.728 I get failures in SSL connection
to e.g. source.squeak.org. The failures happen with both Cog and the
interpreter VM (although the specific error symptoms are different).

I can bypass the errors by reverting MCHttpRepository>>httpGet:arguments:
to its prior version (stamped ul 9/20/2019).

I have not had time to dig into the underlying cause of the problem,
but it seems likely that any CI test for Cog that requires the use
of secure sockets will fail as of Monticello-ul.728 or later. This
would include any test that needs to access the source.squeak.org
repository.

Dave

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Eliot Miranda-2
In reply to this post by Nicolas Cellier
 

On Oct 26, 2020, at 7:22 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:




Le lun. 26 oct. 2020 à 15:11, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 
Hi Nicolas,

On Oct 26, 2020, at 6:59 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:


Hi all,
I have restored (I think) the green status of minheadless build.

Thank you so much!

We could eventually authorize failure of all those builds, or restrict the number of flavours that we build (it takes really loooong time before we get CI feedback).
But if we abandon all those now, I fear that we never catch up; it's a one way ticket. IMO there are still interesting ideas to take, even if development has continued in Pharo fork...

One approach might be to split them into “essential” and “nice to have” so we get faster feedback from the “essential” set.

+1, but I do not know how to configure the CI like that...
Now the next failing build on travis is about squeak.cog.v3. Did some incompatible VM change took place?


######################################################
# Squeak-4.6 on Travis CI (2278.23) #
# 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s #
######################################################
#########################
# 5 tests did not pass: #
#########################
SUnitToolBuilderTests
837fef_266b
✗ #testHandlingNotification (10023ms)
TestValueWithinFix
2a65cb_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingBasic (1005ms)
e9a7ab_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedInner (1001ms)
c57415_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter (1002ms)
e89da3_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingRepeat (3004ms)
Executed 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s.
To reproduce the failed build locally, download smalltalkCI, and try to run something like:
bin/smalltalkci -s Squeak-4.6 --headfull /path/to/.smalltalk.ston
Could these test failures be nothing to do with the VM but instead to do with the (growing) divergence between trunk/spur and Squeak 4.6?

_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)
No idea...
I've downloaded a Squeak4.6-15102.image, compiled a squeak.cog.v3 on windows10, and the test pass...
I will retry on other OSes this evening (the test fails on linux...).

At least one of those failures is a timeout.  So it may just be that the CI box is slow.  We might cure the issues by lengthening the timeouts.  Or we could make them expected failures, especially if we can find out some way to identify that we’re running on a CI box.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Nicolas Cellier
 


Le lun. 26 oct. 2020 à 16:26, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 

On Oct 26, 2020, at 7:22 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:




Le lun. 26 oct. 2020 à 15:11, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 
Hi Nicolas,

On Oct 26, 2020, at 6:59 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:


Hi all,
I have restored (I think) the green status of minheadless build.

Thank you so much!

We could eventually authorize failure of all those builds, or restrict the number of flavours that we build (it takes really loooong time before we get CI feedback).
But if we abandon all those now, I fear that we never catch up; it's a one way ticket. IMO there are still interesting ideas to take, even if development has continued in Pharo fork...

One approach might be to split them into “essential” and “nice to have” so we get faster feedback from the “essential” set.

+1, but I do not know how to configure the CI like that...
Now the next failing build on travis is about squeak.cog.v3. Did some incompatible VM change took place?


######################################################
# Squeak-4.6 on Travis CI (2278.23) #
# 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s #
######################################################
#########################
# 5 tests did not pass: #
#########################
SUnitToolBuilderTests
837fef_266b
✗ #testHandlingNotification (10023ms)
TestValueWithinFix
2a65cb_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingBasic (1005ms)
e9a7ab_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedInner (1001ms)
c57415_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter (1002ms)
e89da3_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingRepeat (3004ms)
Executed 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s.
To reproduce the failed build locally, download smalltalkCI, and try to run something like:
bin/smalltalkci -s Squeak-4.6 --headfull /path/to/.smalltalk.ston
Could these test failures be nothing to do with the VM but instead to do with the (growing) divergence between trunk/spur and Squeak 4.6?

_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)
No idea...
I've downloaded a Squeak4.6-15102.image, compiled a squeak.cog.v3 on windows10, and the test pass...
I will retry on other OSes this evening (the test fails on linux...).

At least one of those failures is a timeout.  So it may just be that the CI box is slow.  We might cure the issues by lengthening the timeouts.  Or we could make them expected failures, especially if we can find out some way to identify that we’re running on a CI box.

There's something fishy...
Only the linux brand times out.
The test waits 10 times 200msec, so should last about 2s.
    [SUnitToolBuilderTests new testHandlingNotification] timeToRun.
does answer something around 2048 on macos brand, but 7706 on linux (???).

The build.itimerheartbeat brand does complete the test in about 2020ms so it's OK.

squeak.cog.spur/build/squeak also performs the test in about 7700ms in an updated trunk image...
So it's not just squeak.cog.v3 here...
I can only run linux thru a VM (Parallels), so if someone can confirm the behavior on some native linux
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Eliot Miranda-2
 


On Oct 26, 2020, at 2:53 PM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:




Le lun. 26 oct. 2020 à 16:26, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 

On Oct 26, 2020, at 7:22 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:




Le lun. 26 oct. 2020 à 15:11, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 
Hi Nicolas,

On Oct 26, 2020, at 6:59 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:


Hi all,
I have restored (I think) the green status of minheadless build.

Thank you so much!

We could eventually authorize failure of all those builds, or restrict the number of flavours that we build (it takes really loooong time before we get CI feedback).
But if we abandon all those now, I fear that we never catch up; it's a one way ticket. IMO there are still interesting ideas to take, even if development has continued in Pharo fork...

One approach might be to split them into “essential” and “nice to have” so we get faster feedback from the “essential” set.

+1, but I do not know how to configure the CI like that...
Now the next failing build on travis is about squeak.cog.v3. Did some incompatible VM change took place?


######################################################
# Squeak-4.6 on Travis CI (2278.23) #
# 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s #
######################################################
#########################
# 5 tests did not pass: #
#########################
SUnitToolBuilderTests
837fef_266b
✗ #testHandlingNotification (10023ms)
TestValueWithinFix
2a65cb_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingBasic (1005ms)
e9a7ab_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedInner (1001ms)
c57415_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter (1002ms)
e89da3_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingRepeat (3004ms)
Executed 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s.
To reproduce the failed build locally, download smalltalkCI, and try to run something like:
bin/smalltalkci -s Squeak-4.6 --headfull /path/to/.smalltalk.ston
Could these test failures be nothing to do with the VM but instead to do with the (growing) divergence between trunk/spur and Squeak 4.6?

_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)
No idea...
I've downloaded a Squeak4.6-15102.image, compiled a squeak.cog.v3 on windows10, and the test pass...
I will retry on other OSes this evening (the test fails on linux...).

At least one of those failures is a timeout.  So it may just be that the CI box is slow.  We might cure the issues by lengthening the timeouts.  Or we could make them expected failures, especially if we can find out some way to identify that we’re running on a CI box.

There's something fishy...
Only the linux brand times out.
The test waits 10 times 200msec, so should last about 2s.
    [SUnitToolBuilderTests new testHandlingNotification] timeToRun.
does answer something around 2048 on macos brand, but 7706 on linux (???).

The build.itimerheartbeat brand does complete the test in about 2020ms so it's OK.

squeak.cog.spur/build/squeak also performs the test in about 7700ms in an updated trunk image...
So it's not just squeak.cog.v3 here...
I can only run linux thru a VM (Parallels), so if someone can confirm the behavior on some native linux

Ah!  Is the kernel older than 2.6.4 (IIRC)?  If so, the heartbeat thread doesn’t work properly because the vm doesn’t have permission or ability to set the heartbeat thread’s priority.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Levente Uzonyi
In reply to this post by David T. Lewis
 
Hi David

On Mon, 26 Oct 2020, David T. Lewis wrote:

> I do not know if it is related to the CI issues, but here is one clue:
>
> I am maintaining a V3 "trunk" image that attempts to keep in sync with
> trunk except for changes that pertain to Spur object format (immediate
> characters, etc). As of Monticello-ul.728 I get failures in SSL connection
> to e.g. source.squeak.org. The failures happen with both Cog and the
> interpreter VM (although the specific error symptoms are different).
>
> I can bypass the errors by reverting MCHttpRepository>>httpGet:arguments:
> to its prior version (stamped ul 9/20/2019).

That version adds some rewrite rules, so some http urls are converted to
https.
If that doesn't work, then there is a problem with the SqueakSSL plugin in
your VM. Does the following print true?

| response |
response := WebClient httpGet: 'https://source.squeak.org'.
response code = 200


Instead of reverting #httpGet:arguments: you can remove the individual
http->https rewrite rules with the following snippet:

  MCHttpRepository urlRewriteRules in: [ :rules |
  rules size // 3 timesRepeat: [
  | set |
  set := rules removeFirst: 3.
  (set second beginsWith: 'https') ifFalse: [
  rules addAll: set ] ] ]

But it would be better to use https for those repositories.


Levente

>
> I have not had time to dig into the underlying cause of the problem,
> but it seems likely that any CI test for Cog that requires the use
> of secure sockets will fail as of Monticello-ul.728 or later. This
> would include any test that needs to access the source.squeak.org
> repository.
>
> Dave
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

What is this

Chloe Ibezim
In reply to this post by Nicolas Cellier
 


On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 at 21:53, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:
 


Le lun. 26 oct. 2020 à 16:26, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 

On Oct 26, 2020, at 7:22 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:




Le lun. 26 oct. 2020 à 15:11, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 
Hi Nicolas,

On Oct 26, 2020, at 6:59 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:


Hi all,
I have restored (I think) the green status of minheadless build.

Thank you so much!

We could eventually authorize failure of all those builds, or restrict the number of flavours that we build (it takes really loooong time before we get CI feedback).
But if we abandon all those now, I fear that we never catch up; it's a one way ticket. IMO there are still interesting ideas to take, even if development has continued in Pharo fork...

One approach might be to split them into “essential” and “nice to have” so we get faster feedback from the “essential” set.

+1, but I do not know how to configure the CI like that...
Now the next failing build on travis is about squeak.cog.v3. Did some incompatible VM change took place?


######################################################
# Squeak-4.6 on Travis CI (2278.23) #
# 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s #
######################################################
#########################
# 5 tests did not pass: #
#########################
SUnitToolBuilderTests
837fef_266b
✗ #testHandlingNotification (10023ms)
TestValueWithinFix
2a65cb_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingBasic (1005ms)
e9a7ab_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedInner (1001ms)
c57415_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter (1002ms)
e89da3_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingRepeat (3004ms)
Executed 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s.
To reproduce the failed build locally, download smalltalkCI, and try to run something like:
bin/smalltalkci -s Squeak-4.6 --headfull /path/to/.smalltalk.ston
Could these test failures be nothing to do with the VM but instead to do with the (growing) divergence between trunk/spur and Squeak 4.6?

_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)
No idea...
I've downloaded a Squeak4.6-15102.image, compiled a squeak.cog.v3 on windows10, and the test pass...
I will retry on other OSes this evening (the test fails on linux...).

At least one of those failures is a timeout.  So it may just be that the CI box is slow.  We might cure the issues by lengthening the timeouts.  Or we could make them expected failures, especially if we can find out some way to identify that we’re running on a CI box.

There's something fishy...
Only the linux brand times out.
The test waits 10 times 200msec, so should last about 2s.
    [SUnitToolBuilderTests new testHandlingNotification] timeToRun.
does answer something around 2048 on macos brand, but 7706 on linux (???).

The build.itimerheartbeat brand does complete the test in about 2020ms so it's OK.

squeak.cog.spur/build/squeak also performs the test in about 7700ms in an updated trunk image...
So it's not just squeak.cog.v3 here...
I can only run linux thru a VM (Parallels), so if someone can confirm the behavior on some native linux
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

David T. Lewis
In reply to this post by Levente Uzonyi
 
Hi Levente,

On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 12:59:55AM +0100, Levente Uzonyi wrote:

>
> Hi David
>
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2020, David T. Lewis wrote:
>
> >I do not know if it is related to the CI issues, but here is one clue:
> >
> >I am maintaining a V3 "trunk" image that attempts to keep in sync with
> >trunk except for changes that pertain to Spur object format (immediate
> >characters, etc). As of Monticello-ul.728 I get failures in SSL connection
> >to e.g. source.squeak.org. The failures happen with both Cog and the
> >interpreter VM (although the specific error symptoms are different).
> >
> >I can bypass the errors by reverting MCHttpRepository>>httpGet:arguments:
> >to its prior version (stamped ul 9/20/2019).
>
> That version adds some rewrite rules, so some http urls are converted to
> https.
> If that doesn't work, then there is a problem with the SqueakSSL plugin in
> your VM. Does the following print true?
>
> | response |
> response := WebClient httpGet: 'https://source.squeak.org'.
> response code = 200
>

With an interpreter VM, I get a failure from primitiveSSLCreate.

With Cog (squeak.cog.v3_linux32x86_202010010729.tar.gz) I also get a
failure on the same primitive call.

So yes it is probably an issue with the SqueakSSL plugin.

Sorry I don't have time to follow up on this properly, I just wanted
to mention that I saw an issue in case it relates to the CI problems.

Dave



>
> Instead of reverting #httpGet:arguments: you can remove the individual
> http->https rewrite rules with the following snippet:
>
> MCHttpRepository urlRewriteRules in: [ :rules |
> rules size // 3 timesRepeat: [
> | set |
> set := rules removeFirst: 3.
> (set second beginsWith: 'https') ifFalse: [
> rules addAll: set ] ] ]
>
> But it would be better to use https for those repositories.
>
>
> Levente
>
> >
> >I have not had time to dig into the underlying cause of the problem,
> >but it seems likely that any CI test for Cog that requires the use
> >of secure sockets will fail as of Monticello-ul.728 or later. This
> >would include any test that needs to access the source.squeak.org
> >repository.
> >
> >Dave
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

timrowledge
 


> On 2020-10-26, at 6:02 PM, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> | response |
>> response := WebClient httpGet: 'https://source.squeak.org'.
>> response code = 200
>>
>
> With an interpreter VM, I get a failure from primitiveSSLCreate.
>
> With Cog (squeak.cog.v3_linux32x86_202010010729.tar.gz) I also get a
> failure on the same primitive call.
>
> So yes it is probably an issue with the SqueakSSL plugin.

Just as a datapoint, it works on on my Pi 4 squeak.cog.spur VM

tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
Never do card tricks for the group you play poker with.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

David T. Lewis
In reply to this post by David T. Lewis
 
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 09:02:40PM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:

>  
> Hi Levente,
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 12:59:55AM +0100, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
> >
> > Hi David
> >
> > On Mon, 26 Oct 2020, David T. Lewis wrote:
> >
> > >I do not know if it is related to the CI issues, but here is one clue:
> > >
> > >I am maintaining a V3 "trunk" image that attempts to keep in sync with
> > >trunk except for changes that pertain to Spur object format (immediate
> > >characters, etc). As of Monticello-ul.728 I get failures in SSL connection
> > >to e.g. source.squeak.org. The failures happen with both Cog and the
> > >interpreter VM (although the specific error symptoms are different).
> > >
> > >I can bypass the errors by reverting MCHttpRepository>>httpGet:arguments:
> > >to its prior version (stamped ul 9/20/2019).
> >
> > That version adds some rewrite rules, so some http urls are converted to
> > https.
> > If that doesn't work, then there is a problem with the SqueakSSL plugin in
> > your VM. Does the following print true?
> >
> > | response |
> > response := WebClient httpGet: 'https://source.squeak.org'.
> > response code = 200
> >
>
> With an interpreter VM, I get a failure from primitiveSSLCreate.
>
> With Cog (squeak.cog.v3_linux32x86_202010010729.tar.gz) I also get a
> failure on the same primitive call.
>
> So yes it is probably an issue with the SqueakSSL plugin.
>
> Sorry I don't have time to follow up on this properly, I just wanted
> to mention that I saw an issue in case it relates to the CI problems.
>
I'm sorry, I reported this incorrectly.

With Cog (squeak.cog.v3_linux32x86_202010010729.tar.gz) I get the
failure on primitiveSSLCreate. Basically "SqueakSSL new" is failing.

With an interpreter VM, SqueakSSL class>>new succeeds, and the failure
happens later with a "Host name mismatch" on the certificate. The
SecureSocketStream thinks that the host name is source.squeak.org,
and the SqueakSSL thinks that its peerName is squeak.org. Very likely
this is a plugin problem also, since the interpreter VM would be using
an outdated version of the plugin.

Dave


SqueakSSLCertificateError.png (68K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Tobias Pape
 
Am 27. Oktober 2020 02:34:37 MEZ schrieb "David T. Lewis" <[hidden email]>:
>

Hi
this looks an awful lot like a very old or brown plugin: SNI / sAN seems not to work.

but on the other hand, is webclient outdated? the host name seems not to be send to the plug in...

-t

--
Sent from a mobile device
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Tobias Pape
 
Hi

On 27.10.2020, at 07:04, Tobias <[hidden email]> wrote:


Am 27. Oktober 2020 02:34:37 MEZ schrieb "David T. Lewis" <[hidden email]>:


Hi
this looks an awful lot like a very old or brown plugin: SNI / sAN seems not to work. 

but on the other hand, is webclient outdated? the host name seems not to be send to the plug in...

I've had a look, but I cannot reproduce :(

See screenshot.

Please tell me the openssl version used.

Best regards
-Tobias

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Nicolas Cellier
In reply to this post by Eliot Miranda-2
 


Le mar. 27 oct. 2020 à 00:00, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 


On Oct 26, 2020, at 2:53 PM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:




Le lun. 26 oct. 2020 à 16:26, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 

On Oct 26, 2020, at 7:22 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:




Le lun. 26 oct. 2020 à 15:11, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 
Hi Nicolas,

On Oct 26, 2020, at 6:59 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:


Hi all,
I have restored (I think) the green status of minheadless build.

Thank you so much!

We could eventually authorize failure of all those builds, or restrict the number of flavours that we build (it takes really loooong time before we get CI feedback).
But if we abandon all those now, I fear that we never catch up; it's a one way ticket. IMO there are still interesting ideas to take, even if development has continued in Pharo fork...

One approach might be to split them into “essential” and “nice to have” so we get faster feedback from the “essential” set.

+1, but I do not know how to configure the CI like that...
Now the next failing build on travis is about squeak.cog.v3. Did some incompatible VM change took place?


######################################################
# Squeak-4.6 on Travis CI (2278.23) #
# 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s #
######################################################
#########################
# 5 tests did not pass: #
#########################
SUnitToolBuilderTests
837fef_266b
✗ #testHandlingNotification (10023ms)
TestValueWithinFix
2a65cb_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingBasic (1005ms)
e9a7ab_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedInner (1001ms)
c57415_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter (1002ms)
e89da3_266b
✗ #testValueWithinTimingRepeat (3004ms)
Executed 3401 Tests with 5 Failures and 0 Errors in 112.13s.
To reproduce the failed build locally, download smalltalkCI, and try to run something like:
bin/smalltalkci -s Squeak-4.6 --headfull /path/to/.smalltalk.ston
Could these test failures be nothing to do with the VM but instead to do with the (growing) divergence between trunk/spur and Squeak 4.6?

_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)
No idea...
I've downloaded a Squeak4.6-15102.image, compiled a squeak.cog.v3 on windows10, and the test pass...
I will retry on other OSes this evening (the test fails on linux...).

At least one of those failures is a timeout.  So it may just be that the CI box is slow.  We might cure the issues by lengthening the timeouts.  Or we could make them expected failures, especially if we can find out some way to identify that we’re running on a CI box.

There's something fishy...
Only the linux brand times out.
The test waits 10 times 200msec, so should last about 2s.
    [SUnitToolBuilderTests new testHandlingNotification] timeToRun.
does answer something around 2048 on macos brand, but 7706 on linux (???).

The build.itimerheartbeat brand does complete the test in about 2020ms so it's OK.

squeak.cog.spur/build/squeak also performs the test in about 7700ms in an updated trunk image...
So it's not just squeak.cog.v3 here...
I can only run linux thru a VM (Parallels), so if someone can confirm the behavior on some native linux

Ah!  Is the kernel older than 2.6.4 (IIRC)?  If so, the heartbeat thread doesn’t work properly because the vm doesn’t have permission or ability to set the heartbeat thread’s priority.

No, it's an ubuntu 16:

$ uname -a
Linux ubuntu 4.4.0-193-generic #224-Ubuntu SMP Tue Oct 6 17:15:28 UTC 2020 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

I hopefully have the correct setup for authorizing thread priority

$ cat /etc/security/limits.d/squeak.conf
*       hard    rtprio  2
*       soft    rtprio  2

I have no warning in the console telling that "pthread_setschedparam failed"...

So I don't know what's going on. Can someone reproduce?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

David T. Lewis
In reply to this post by Tobias Pape
 
On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 07:04:20AM +0100, Tobias wrote:
>  
> Am 27. Oktober 2020 02:34:37 MEZ schrieb "David T. Lewis" <[hidden email]>:
> >
>
> Hi
> this looks an awful lot like a very old or brown plugin: SNI / sAN seems not to work.
>
> but on the other hand, is webclient outdated? the host name seems not to be send to the plug in...
>

The plugin in my interpreter VM is outdated, yes. But it's the Cog VM
that would be of interest here. With Cog, I see a primitive failure
in SqueakSSL>>primitiveSSLCreate.

Here is the VM I am running:

Virtual Machine
---------------
/usr/local/lib/squeak/4.5-202010010729/squeak
Open Smalltalk Cog[SqueakV3] VM [CoInterpreterPrimitives VMMaker.oscog-eem.2831]
Unix built on Oct  1 2020 07:59:33 Compiler: 5.4.0 20160609
platform sources revision VM: 202010010729 https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm.git Date: Thu Oct 1 09:29:33 2020 CommitHash: f679770 Plugins: 202010010729 https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm.git
CoInterpreter VMMaker.oscog-eem.2831 uuid: f4fed277-6b62-4e79-9147-c5405589f2b1 Oct  1 2020
StackToRegisterMappingCogit VMMaker.oscog-eem.2824 uuid: 8f091e5b-fc0f-4b4b-ab5e-e90e598f75ee Oct  1 2020

To Build A Similar Virtual Machine
----------------------------------
Visit https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm; follow the
"Clone or download" instructions, then read the top-level README.md
and HowToBuild files in the top-level build directory for your
platform(s), build.macos64x64/HowToBuild, build.win32x86/HowToBuild, etc.

Loaded VM Modules
-----------------
AioPlugin VMConstruction-Plugins-AioPlugin.oscog-eem.25 (i)
B2DPlugin VMMaker.oscog-eem.2805 (i)
BitBltPlugin VMMaker.oscog-eem.2821 (i)
CroquetPlugin VMMaker.oscog-eem.2744 (i)
FilePlugin VMMaker.oscog-eem.2795 (i)
FloatArrayPlugin VMMaker.oscog-eem.2759 (i)
LargeIntegers v2.0 VMMaker.oscog-eem.2821 (i)
Matrix2x3Plugin VMMaker.oscog-eem.2780 (i)
MiscPrimitivePlugin VMMaker.oscog-eem.2761 (i)
SecurityPlugin VMMaker.oscog-eem.2790 (i)
SocketPlugin VMMaker.oscog-eem.2823 (i)
SqueakSSL VMMaker.oscog-eem.2805 (e)
UnixOSProcessPlugin VMConstruction-Plugins-OSProcessPlugin.oscog-eem.69 (e)


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

timrowledge
In reply to this post by Nicolas Cellier
 


> On 2020-10-27, at 1:33 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> No, it's an ubuntu 16:
>
> $ uname -a
> Linux ubuntu 4.4.0-193-generic #224-Ubuntu SMP Tue Oct 6 17:15:28 UTC 2020 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> I hopefully have the correct setup for authorizing thread priority
>
> $ cat /etc/security/limits.d/squeak.conf
> *       hard    rtprio  2
> *       soft    rtprio  2
>
> I have no warning in the console telling that "pthread_setschedparam failed"...
>
> So I don't know what's going on. Can someone reproduce?

Actually yeah, kinda.

I have a linux i7 box I mostly use to run an ancient VW product on. It's a recent Ubuntu 18.0.4 download with that horrible xfce ui stuff (really, what were they thinking). Aside from many other faults it (mis)works with VNC in annoying ways tha mean it frequently stops sharing the copy/paste buffer.

Anyway.

uname -a  tells me (and I can't paste it, of course!)
4.15.0-101generic #102-Ubuntu SMP etc etc
I have run the limits.d set up several times and the file is  ok. And yes, I have rebooted plenty of times.

It *never* works to make squeak happy. Did I mention that Ubuntu is not very good?

tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
A computer's attention span is only as long as its extension cord.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Nicolas Cellier
 


Le mar. 27 oct. 2020 à 19:02, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> a écrit :
 


> On 2020-10-27, at 1:33 AM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> No, it's an ubuntu 16:
>
> $ uname -a
> Linux ubuntu 4.4.0-193-generic #224-Ubuntu SMP Tue Oct 6 17:15:28 UTC 2020 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> I hopefully have the correct setup for authorizing thread priority
>
> $ cat /etc/security/limits.d/squeak.conf
> *       hard    rtprio  2
> *       soft    rtprio  2
>
> I have no warning in the console telling that "pthread_setschedparam failed"...
>
> So I don't know what's going on. Can someone reproduce?

Actually yeah, kinda.

I have a linux i7 box I mostly use to run an ancient VW product on. It's a recent Ubuntu 18.0.4 download with that horrible xfce ui stuff (really, what were they thinking). Aside from many other faults it (mis)works with VNC in annoying ways tha mean it frequently stops sharing the copy/paste buffer.

Anyway.

uname -a  tells me (and I can't paste it, of course!)
4.15.0-101generic #102-Ubuntu SMP etc etc
I have run the limits.d set up several times and the file is  ok. And yes, I have rebooted plenty of times.

It *never* works to make squeak happy. Did I mention that Ubuntu is not very good?

tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
A computer's attention span is only as long as its extension cord.


Hi Tim,
what is the result on that box with threaded heartbeat VM of:

   [SUnitToolBuilderTests new testHandlingNotification] timeToRun.

If it is more than 5000 ms, then you would confirm the problem that I encounter.

This testHandlingNotification is repeating 10 loops with a 200ms delay wait.
The problem I've got with threaded heartbeat VM is that first 5 delays run normally, but next 5 will last for 1 second instead of 200ms...
This is probably what happens on the CI server too (the test times out and CI fails).


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Tobias Pape
 
Hi

> On 27.10.2020, at 23:39, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi Tim,
> what is the result on that box with threaded heartbeat VM of:
>
>    [SUnitToolBuilderTests new testHandlingNotification] timeToRun.
>
> If it is more than 5000 ms, then you would confirm the problem that I encounter.
>
> This testHandlingNotification is repeating 10 loops with a 200ms delay wait.
> The problem I've got with threaded heartbeat VM is that first 5 delays run normally, but next 5 will last for 1 second instead of 200ms...
> This is probably what happens on the CI server too (the test times out and CI fails).

Also note that the CI test builds both vms but uses the last one built (because it overwrites the first), and that happens to be the itimer one, not th ethreaded.

The code above runs in around ~2000 ms on my machine (~2015, with ubuntu 18.04)

Things that happened:
        - I just ran the test suite in the DEBUG itimer headful and headless variant and it passes.
        - I just ran the test suite in the DEBUG threaded headful and headless variant and it passes.
        - I ran the RELEASE itimer headful and headless variant and it passes
        - I ran the RELEASE threaded headless variant and it FAILED as on the CI
        - I ran the RELEASE threaded headful variant and it FAILED LESS
                I mean: testHandlingNotification passed, and so did  testValueWithinTimingBasic and testValueWithinTimingNestedInner
                but testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter testValueWithinTimingRepeat still fail!

So there are discrepancies between
        debug and release and
        headful and headless (at least for threaded release)

TL;DR: The linux x86_32 cog v3 threaded release vm has a timing problem ...

Does that help anyone?

Best regards
        -Tobias

BTW: Eliot, the VM spits out a "aioDisable: epoll_ctl: Bad file descriptor". Is that expected?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CI status

Eliot Miranda-2
In reply to this post by Nicolas Cellier
 
Hi Tobi, Hi Levente,

> On Oct 28, 2020, at 7:06 AM, Tobias Pape <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> 
> Hi
>
>>>>> On 27.10.2020, at 23:39, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi Tim,
>> what is the result on that box with threaded heartbeat VM of:
>> [SUnitToolBuilderTests new testHandlingNotification] timeToRun.
>> If it is more than 5000 ms, then you would confirm the problem that I encounter.
>> This testHandlingNotification is repeating 10 loops with a 200ms delay wait.
>> The problem I've got with threaded heartbeat VM is that first 5 delays run normally, but next 5 will last for 1 second instead of 200ms...
>> This is probably what happens on the CI server too (the test times out and CI fails).
>
> Also note that the CI test builds both vms but uses the last one built (because it overwrites the first), and that happens to be the itimer one, not th ethreaded.
>
> The code above runs in around ~2000 ms on my machine (~2015, with ubuntu 18.04)
>
> Things that happened:
> - I just ran the test suite in the DEBUG itimer headful and headless variant and it passes.
> - I just ran the test suite in the DEBUG threaded headful and headless variant and it passes.
> - I ran the RELEASE itimer headful and headless variant and it passes
> - I ran the RELEASE threaded headless variant and it FAILED as on the CI
> - I ran the RELEASE threaded headful variant and it FAILED LESS
>     I mean: testHandlingNotification passed, and so did  testValueWithinTimingBasic and testValueWithinTimingNestedInner
>     but testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter testValueWithinTimingRepeat still fail!
>
> So there are discrepancies between
> debug and release    and
> headful and headless    (at least for threaded release)
>
> TL;DR: The linux x86_32 cog v3 threaded release vm has a timing problem ...
>
> Does that help anyone?

If you add code to extract the number of ioProcessEvents calls etc (see About Squeak VM parameters tab for the relevant info) does that tell us more?  IIRC one available vm parameter is the number of heartbeats.  So we should be able to see if it is the heartbeat itself that is failing or if it is further up stream.

>
> Best regards
> -Tobias
>
> BTW: Eliot, the VM spits out a "aioDisable: epoll_ctl: Bad file descriptor". Is that expected?

It’s not expected, but may be harmless.  Levente, is this noise?  Or is it that the input file descriptor is being shut down?  Presumably this is just noise U.K. do with running headless.
12