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

Issue 727354 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: WontFix
Owner:
Closed: May 2017
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 1
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment

Android PFQ missing HWTests

Project Member Reported by davidri...@chromium.org, May 29 2017

Issue description

Comment 1 by nya@chromium.org, May 30 2017

Owner: nya@chromium.org
Status: WontFix (was: Untriaged)
Android PFQ skips HWTests when Android container of new version is not available. You can see following logs in UprevAndroid stage when remaining stages are skipped:

18:19:18: INFO: Stable candidate found 4048825-r2
18:19:18: INFO: Previous ebuild with same version found and ebuild is redundant.
18:19:19: INFO: Found nothing to rev.
18:19:19: INFO: android_atom_to_build = None
18:19:19: INFO: Android already uprevved. Nothing else to do.

https://uberchromegw.corp.google.com/i/chromeos/builders/caroline-nyc-android-pfq/builds/126/steps/UprevAndroid/logs/stdio

But I know this is confusing, so I'm adding buildbot step text to clarify this:
https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/517608/1/cbuildbot/stages/android_stages.py#192

Comment 2 by nya@chromium.org, May 30 2017

Or if you think we should always run HWTest even if no uprev will happen, please reopen.

Comment 3 by ihf@chromium.org, May 30 2017

To be honest, I think it is confusing. The Android PFQ seems to work differently from the Chrome PFQ. Now this might be a good thing. It appears to me the Android PFQ keeps accumulating OS and Chrome changes without testing them on the actual PFQ boards, but ultimately also without displaying them properly once a hardware test actually runs (the build page will only show the last few OS changes, right)? I don't have strong feelings: not running HWTest has its benefits. But something doesn't seem quite right with the current setup.

Comment 4 by nya@chromium.org, May 30 2017

Yes, I definitely agree it's confusing... and I guess ExitEarlyException is evil. Maybe it's better if we could mark remaining stages explicitly "skipped", though such cleanup seems to cost more than benefit IMO. Any good idea to clarify this more is welcomed.

I might be misremembering (and have too much on my plate right now to go and veirfy), but I feel like the logic should be the same between Android and Chrome PFQs.  I based the original code on the Chrome PFQ, including the skipping logic.  Could it just be that NOP Chrome PFQ runs just don't happen as often?

Comment 6 by ihf@chromium.org, May 30 2017

NOP Chrome PFQ runs happen after a successful uprev. So I went to the waterfall: they behave exactly like the Android PFQ, no HWTests are run.

So we have consistency. Nothing to see here. WontFix.

Sign in to add a comment