On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 02:23:21PM -0500, Kunal Mehta wrote:
> severity 1028041 normal
> thanks
>
> Hi,
>
> On 1/6/23 13:47, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 08:59:08AM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > > =====================================================================
> > > FAILED TEST SUMMARY
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ExcimerProfiler CPU profile [tests/cpu.phpt]
> > > =====================================================================
> > >
> > > Please fix ASAP to not block the php8.2 transition.
> >
> > It built after I gave it back to build on the right buildd,
> > so it's now rebuilt with PHP 8.2.
>
> Thanks.
>
> > The issue might depend on buildd speed, or some weird difference
> > between buildds.
>
> Looking through my email, it's flaked before in the past (#1014801). The
> test in question[1] has the following comment:
>
> // Test aggregateByFunction
> // Typically the parent functions foo() and bar() will have self=0 and
> // inclusive ~= 30. The other 4 functions will have a count of about 30/4 =
> 7.5.
> // The probability of C::member() or baz() having a count of zero is about 1
> in 5600.
>
> Maybe the known flakiness is worse due to something on the mipsel build?
>...
I am not convinced that this is flakiness, my guess (that could be wrong!)
would be tests failing on all except the fastest mipsel buildds.
It is problematic that the test doesn't output what exactly fails.
On the porterbox the test passes initially, but it fails after
-$profiler->setPeriod(0.1);
+$profiler->setPeriod(10);
I do not know whether or not this is the same failure as on the mipsel
buildds.
> -- Kunal
cu
Adrian