[kvm-unit-tests PATCH v8 06/35] gitlab-ci: Run migration selftest on s390x and powerpc

[Thomas Huth]

On 16/04/2024 09.55, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 16/04/2024 09.18, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 11/04/2024 21.22, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> On 08/04/2024 18.06, Nico Boehr wrote:
>>>> Quoting Nicholas Piggin (2024-04-05 10:35:07)
>>>>> The migration harness is complicated and easy to break so CI will
>>>>> be helpful.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin at gmail.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>   .gitlab-ci.yml      | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>>>>>   s390x/unittests.cfg |  8 ++++++++
>>>>>   2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/.gitlab-ci.yml b/.gitlab-ci.yml
>>>>> index ff34b1f50..60b3cdfd2 100644
>>>>> --- a/.gitlab-ci.yml
>>>>> +++ b/.gitlab-ci.yml
>>>> [...]
>>>>> @@ -135,7 +147,7 @@ build-riscv64:
>>>>>   build-s390x:
>>>>>    extends: .outoftree_template
>>>>>    script:
>>>>> - - dnf install -y qemu-system-s390x gcc-s390x-linux-gnu
>>>>> + - dnf install -y qemu-system-s390x gcc-s390x-linux-gnu nmap-ncat
>>>>>    - mkdir build
>>>>>    - cd build
>>>>>    - ../configure --arch=s390x --cross-prefix=s390x-linux-gnu-
>>>>> @@ -161,6 +173,8 @@ build-s390x:
>>>>>         sclp-1g
>>>>>         sclp-3g
>>>>>         selftest-setup
>>>>> +      selftest-migration-kvm
>>>>
>>>> We're running under TCG in the Gitlab CI. I'm a little bit confused why
>>>> we're running a KVM-only test here.
>>>
>>> The build-s390x job is TCG, indeed, but we have the "s390x-kvm" job that 
>>> runs on a KVM-capable s390x host, so it could be added there?
>>
>> I now gave it a try and it seems to work, so I updated this patch and 
>> pushed it to the repository now.
> 
> Hmm, "selftest-migration" now was failing once here:
> 
>   https://gitlab.com/kvm-unit-tests/kvm-unit-tests/-/jobs/6633865591
> 
> Let's keep an eye on it, and if it is not stable enough, we might need to 
> disable it in the CI again...

And it just failed again:

  https://gitlab.com/kvm-unit-tests/kvm-unit-tests/-/jobs/6635395811

... not sure whether this is due to the slow CI machine or whether there is 
still a bug lurking around somewhere, but anyway, I disabled it now for the 
CI again to avoid that other MRs get affected.

  Thomas