New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 662398 link

Starred by 3 users

Issue metadata

Status: Assigned
Owner:
Last visit > 30 days ago
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: Android
Pri: 1
Type: Bug

Blocked on:
issue 660852

Blocking:
issue 661488
issue 661495
issue 661499
issue 661508
issue 661512
issue 661514
issue 661518
issue 661529
issue 661531
issue 661532
issue 661533
issue 661554
issue 661555
issue 661923
issue 661950
issue 663098
issue 663113
issue 663122
issue 663130
issue 663133
issue 663134
issue 663158
issue 664172
issue 665335
issue 665336
issue 665370
issue 665954
issue 666010
issue 668186
issue 670221
issue 671216
issue 671222



Sign in to add a comment

Bisects failing with purple device_status step

Project Member Reported by sullivan@chromium.org, Nov 4 2016

Issue description

We're seeing over a dozen bisect failures with a purple device_status step. Can someone from clank infra take a look?

https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_one_perf_bisect/builds/1776
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5X_perf_bisect/builds/821
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5X_perf_bisect/builds/822
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus6_perf_bisect/builds/2718
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus6_perf_bisect/builds/2719
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_webview_arm64_aosp_perf_bisect/builds/414
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5X_perf_bisect/builds/823
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_webview_arm64_aosp_perf_bisect/builds/415
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5X_perf_bisect/builds/824
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_webview_arm64_aosp_perf_bisect/builds/416
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_webview_arm64_aosp_perf_bisect/builds/418
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5X_perf_bisect/builds/825
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/builds/4319
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/builds/4319/steps/device_status%20%283%29/logs/stdio

ADB server didn't ACK
* failed to start daemon *
error: protocol fault (couldn't read status): Connection reset by peer
error: protocol fault (couldn't read status): Connection reset by peer
List of devices attached
adb server is out of date.  killing...
C   29.625s Main  (TimeoutThread-1-for-MainThread) Exception on _RunAdbCmd(<class 'devil.android.sdk.adb_wrapper.AdbWrapper'>, ['devices', '-l'], retries=2, timeout=30), attempt 1 of 3: AdbCommandFailedError("adb devices -l: failed with exit status 1 and output:\n- cannot bind 'tcp:5037': Address already in use\n- ADB server didn't ACK\n- * failed to start daemon *\n- error: protocol fault (couldn't read status): Connection reset by peer\n- error: protocol fault (couldn't read status): Connection reset by peer\n- List of devices attached\n- adb server is out of date.  killing...\n",)
I   29.625s TimeoutThread-2-for-MainThread  [host]> /b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/bin/deps/linux2/x86_64/bin/adb devices -l
D   58.804s TimeoutThread-2-for-MainThread  STDOUT+STDERR: cannot bind 'tcp:5037': Address already in use
ADB server didn't ACK
* failed to start daemon *
error: protocol fault (couldn't read status): Connection reset by peer
error: protocol fault (couldn't read status): Connection reset by peer
List of devices attached
adb server is out of date.  killing...
C   58.813s Main  (TimeoutThread-2-for-MainThread) Exception on _RunAdbCmd(<class 'devil.android.sdk.adb_wrapper.AdbWrapper'>, ['devices', '-l'], retries=2, timeout=30), attempt 2 of 3: AdbCommandFailedError("adb devices -l: failed with exit status 1 and output:\n- cannot bind 'tcp:5037': Address already in use\n- ADB server didn't ACK\n- * failed to start daemon *\n- error: protocol fault (couldn't read status): Connection reset by peer\n- error: protocol fault (couldn't read status): Connection reset by peer\n- List of devices attached\n- adb server is out of date.  killing...\n",)
I   58.813s TimeoutThread-3-for-MainThread  [host]> /b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/bin/deps/linux2/x86_64/bin/adb devices -l
C   88.838s Main  Timed out. Dumping threads.
C   88.838s Main  ********************************************************************************
C   88.838s Main  Stack dump for thread 'TimeoutThread-3-for-MainThread'
C   88.838s Main  ********************************************************************************
C   88.839s Main  File: "/usr/lib/python2.7/threading.py", line 783, in __bootstrap
C   88.839s Main    self.__bootstrap_inner()
C   88.839s Main  File: "/usr/lib/python2.7/threading.py", line 810, in __bootstrap_inner
C   88.839s Main    self.run()
C   88.839s Main  File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/utils/reraiser_thread.py", line 81, in run
C   88.839s Main    self._ret = self._func(*self._args, **self._kwargs)
C   88.839s Main  File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/utils/timeout_retry.py", line 152, in <lambda>
C   88.839s Main    child_thread = reraiser_thread.ReraiserThread(lambda: func(*args, **kwargs),
C   88.839s Main  File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/android/decorators.py", line 47, in impl
C   88.839s Main    return f(*args, **kwargs)
C   88.839s Main  File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/android/sdk/adb_wrapper.py", line 249, in _RunAdbCmd
C   88.839s Main    timeout_retry.CurrentTimeoutThreadGroup().GetRemainingTime())
C   88.839s Main  File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/utils/cmd_helper.py", line 272, in GetCmdStatusAndOutputWithTimeout
C   88.839s Main    for data in _IterProcessStdout(process, timeout=timeout):
C   88.839s Main  File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/utils/cmd_helper.py", line 229, in _IterProcessStdout
C   88.839s Main    read_fds, _, _ = select.select([child_fd], [], [], poll_interval)
C   88.839s Main  ********************************************************************************
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/android/tools/device_status.py", line 313, in <module>
    sys.exit(main())
  File "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/android/tools/device_status.py", line 282, in main
    statuses = DeviceStatus(devices, blacklist)
  File "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/android/tools/device_status.py", line 104, in DeviceStatus
    for a in adb_wrapper.AdbWrapper.Devices(desired_state=None, long_list=True)
  File "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/android/sdk/adb_wrapper.py", line 360, in Devices
    retries=retries)
  File "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/android/sdk/adb_wrapper.py", line 380, in _RawDevices
    output = cls._RunAdbCmd(cmd, timeout=timeout, retries=retries)
  File "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/android/decorators.py", line 57, in timeout_retry_wrapper
    retry_if_func=retry_if_func)
  File "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/utils/timeout_retry.py", line 159, in Run
    error_log_func=error_log_func)
  File "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/utils/reraiser_thread.py", line 186, in JoinAll
    self._JoinAll(watcher, timeout)
  File "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/utils/reraiser_thread.py", line 151, in _JoinAll
    (len(alive_threads), len(self._threads)))
devil.android.device_errors.CommandTimeoutError: Timed out waiting for 1 of 1 threads.
 
I don't think I've seen a failure like this before:

@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@INFO:devil.utils.cmd_helper:[host]> /b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/bin/deps/linux2/x86_64/bin/adb devices@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:Timed out. Dumping threads.@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:********************************************************************************@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:Stack dump for thread 'TimeoutThread-3-for-MainThread'@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:********************************************************************************@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:File: "/usr/lib/python2.7/threading.py", line 783, in __bootstrap@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:  self.__bootstrap_inner()@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:File: "/usr/lib/python2.7/threading.py", line 810, in __bootstrap_inner@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:  self.run()@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/utils/reraiser_thread.py", line 81, in run@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:  self._ret = self._func(*self._args, **self._kwargs)@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/utils/timeout_retry.py", line 152, in <lambda>@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:  child_thread = reraiser_thread.ReraiserThread(lambda: func(*args, **kwargs),@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/android/decorators.py", line 47, in impl@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:  return f(*args, **kwargs)@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/android/sdk/adb_wrapper.py", line 249, in _RunAdbCmd@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:  timeout_retry.CurrentTimeoutThreadGroup().GetRemainingTime())@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/utils/cmd_helper.py", line 272, in GetCmdStatusAndOutputWithTimeout@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:  for data in _IterProcessStdout(process, timeout=timeout):@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:File: "/b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/devil/utils/cmd_helper.py", line 229, in _IterProcessStdout@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:  read_fds, _, _ = select.select([child_fd], [], [], poll_interval)@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:********************************************************************************@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@INFO:devil.utils.cmd_helper:[host]> /b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/bin/deps/linux2/x86_64/bin/adb kill-server@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:(TimeoutThread-1-for-MainThread) Exception on _RunAdbCmd(<class 'devil.android.sdk.adb_wrapper.AdbWrapper'>, ['kill-server'], retries=2, timeout=30), attempt 1 of 3: AdbCommandFailedError('adb kill-server: failed with exit status 1 and output:\n- * server not running *\n',)@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@INFO:devil.utils.cmd_helper:[host]> /b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/bin/deps/linux2/x86_64/bin/adb kill-server@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@CRITICAL:root:(TimeoutThread-2-for-MainThread) Exception on _RunAdbCmd(<class 'devil.android.sdk.adb_wrapper.AdbWrapper'>, ['kill-server'], retries=2, timeout=30), attempt 2 of 3: AdbCommandFailedError('adb kill-server: failed with exit status 1 and output:\n- * server not running *\n',)@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@INFO:devil.utils.cmd_helper:[host]> /b/c/b/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/src/third_party/catapult/devil/bin/deps/linux2/x86_64/bin/adb kill-server@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@INFO:root:Try printing formatted exception: <class 'devil.android.device_errors.AdbCommandFailedError'> adb kill-server: failed with exit status 1 and output:@@@
@@@STEP_LOG_LINE@Failure Output@- * server not running *@@@

It is:
 - running `adb devices`, which times out
 - trying to kill the adb server, but it can't find one

(There are also various protocol faults in the log.)

I'm wondering if something else is binding port 5037.
Blocking: 661950
Cc: bpastene@chromium.org stip@chromium.org
There have been a lot of issues with adb this week. I'm tempted to call this P0 as it's not really getting the attention it deserves. What's the plan? Stip?
#3: As mentioned in #1, there's no evidence in the log that this is similar to the other adb issues we've been seeing lately.
Blocking: 661495

Comment 6 by stip@chromium.org, Nov 7 2016

Right now I'm focusing all my effort on crbug.com/660852.
Blocking: 663158
Blocking: 663130
Blocking: 663134
Blocking: 663122
Blocking: 663098
Blocking: 663113
Blocking: 663133
Ping on this? It's blocking dozens of bisects.
Blocking: 664172
Blocking: 665370
Blocking: 665335
Issue 656584 has been merged into this issue.
Blockedon: 660852
Owner: stip@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)

Comment 21 by stip@chromium.org, Nov 16 2016

Running adb as a background process is really destroying us, especially for bisect. I'm hoping we can move to a more isolated process model soon (i.e., swarming).

As for this bug, I am punting on https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=660852 while John and I hash out the proper way to fix it and work on this bug instead. I really am worried that we have set ourselves up for tons of these adb errors unless we address it systematically in the future.

Comment 22 by stip@chromium.org, Nov 16 2016

I'm trying to determine if this is something that happens when we cross a particular CL or if it is persistent.
I think you could grab the data on which CLs this is happening on programatically. You can look at comments from 425761728072-pa1bs18esuhp2cp2qfa1u9vb6p1v6kfu@developer.gserviceaccount.com on the blocked bug which have a url matching https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/\d+

Then those urls have data from buildbucket API, including:
 DATA:{
    "parameters": {
        "properties": {
            "bisect_config": {
                "bad_revision"
                "good_revision"

Comment 24 by stip@chromium.org, Nov 17 2016

I went through all the linked bugs that had descriptions in the titles that made sense (some of them like https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=661495 had crazy high revisions, not sure what's up with that). I got:

427319:427336                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
427319:427336                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
427328:427364                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
427365:427416                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
427659:427742                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
427813:428224                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
428221:428276                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
428608:428609                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
428688:428697                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
428688:428709                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
429246:429299                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
429278:429344                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
429300:429396                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
429360:429542                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
429465:429511                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
429481:429534                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
429936:429982   

Comment 29 by stip@chromium.org, Nov 17 2016

I am beginning to suspect this is a TIME_WAIT issue http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/Tech/addrinuse.html
Project Member

Comment 30 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Nov 17 2016


===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: failed


=== Bisection aborted ===
The bisect was aborted because Bisect cannot identify a culprit: Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence.
Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error.

===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean      Std Dev   N   Good?
chromium@427100  57488208  7275173   27  good
chromium@427201  56664457  13685181  27  bad

Bisect job ran on: android_nexus5X_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 662398

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=browse.social.twitter system_health.memory_mobile
Test Metric: memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:cc:effective_size_avg/browse_social/browse_social_twitter
Relative Change: None

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5X_perf_bisect/builds/877
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8995788331168950864


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5022129039343616

| O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq
|  X  | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback,
| / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect.  Thank you!
Project Member

Comment 31 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Nov 17 2016


===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: failed


=== Bisection aborted ===
The bisect was aborted because Bisect cannot identify a culprit: Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence.
Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error.

===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean      Std Dev   N   Good?
chromium@427200  56664457  13685181  27  good
chromium@427301  56664457  13685181  27  bad

Bisect job ran on: android_nexus5X_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 662398

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=browse.social.twitter system_health.memory_mobile
Test Metric: memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:cc:effective_size_avg/browse_social/browse_social_twitter
Relative Change: None

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5X_perf_bisect/builds/878
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8995788309007888288


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5245199171715072

| O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq
|  X  | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback,
| / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect.  Thank you!
Project Member

Comment 32 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Nov 17 2016


===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: failed


=== Bisection aborted ===
The bisect was aborted because Bisect cannot identify a culprit: Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence.
Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error.

===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean      Std Dev   N   Good?
chromium@427300  55840706  16881874  27  good
chromium@427318  57213625  10088849  27  bad

Bisect job ran on: android_nexus5X_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 662398

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=browse.social.twitter system_health.memory_mobile
Test Metric: memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:cc:effective_size_avg/browse_social/browse_social_twitter
Relative Change: None

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5X_perf_bisect/builds/879
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8995788286767809968


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5570333430513664

| O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq
|  X  | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback,
| / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect.  Thank you!
Project Member

Comment 33 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Nov 17 2016


===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: failed


=== Bisection aborted ===
The bisect was aborted because Bisect cannot identify a culprit: Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence.
Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error.

===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean      Std Dev   N   Good?
chromium@427000  57488208  7275173   27  good
chromium@427001  57213625  10088849  27  bad

Bisect job ran on: android_nexus5X_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 662398

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=browse.social.twitter system_health.memory_mobile
Test Metric: memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:cc:effective_size_avg/browse_social/browse_social_twitter
Relative Change: None

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5X_perf_bisect/builds/876
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8995788364347157264


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5578935176265728

| O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq
|  X  | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback,
| / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect.  Thank you!
Re #24: "some of them like https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=661495 had crazy high revisions, not sure what's up with that"

Those are unix timestamps used as point id's for internal bots (because chromium commit positions are not enough to uniquely identify builds). I do agree though, that it is confusing and not very useful.

For some time I've thought to file a bug about this, and so I just did now https://github.com/catapult-project/catapult/issues/3014
Just in case it's not clear, all the bisects in #30-33 ran the tests successfully and got values, the only part that "failed" is that they didn't reproduce a regression. device_status was fine on them.
Blocking: 665954
Blocking: 665336
Blocking: 666010
Blocking: 671216
Blocking: 671222
Blocking: 670221
Blocking: 668186

Comment 43 by stip@chromium.org, Jan 18 2017

Owner: ----
Status: Available (was: Assigned)
AFAIU this is still unresolved. I am marking most of my bugs as available. My hope is that these kinds of persistent adb issues can be solved when (one day) we can run bisect tests on swarming.
Owner: jbudorick@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Available)
John, can you find an owner? P1 + Available is bad practice.
Just a note on priority: this affects our ability to bisect backwards in time. I think we've given up on the bugs from November that this affects. So triage here might be more about figuring out:

1) When it's likely to happen again
2) Whether pinpoint would be a viable solution
Owner: mikec...@chromium.org
I can take a look at this.
Components: Speed>Bisection

Comment 49 by stip@chromium.org, Feb 10 2017

Cc: -stip@chromium.org
Components: Infra>Client>Chrome
Labels: OS-Android
Moving Infra>Client>Android -> Infra>Client>Chrome+OS=Android
Components: -Infra>Client>Android

Sign in to add a comment