iperf tests handle under-speed links poorly

Bug #1695945 reported by Rod Smith
14
This bug affects 2 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Checkbox Provider - Base
Fix Released
High
Rod Smith

Bug Description

When the ethernet/multi_iperf3_nic_device* tests detect an under-speed link (say, a 10 Gbps device hooked up to a 1 Gbps switch), the result is a rather awkward and lengthy batch of output, like this:

INFO:root:-------------------- Test Run Number 1 --------------------
ERROR:root:Detected link speed (1000) is lower than detected max speed (10000)
ERROR:root:Check your device configuration and try again
INFO:root:
INFO:root:-------------------- Test Run Number 1 --------------------
ERROR:root:Detected link speed (1000) is lower than detected max speed (10000)
ERROR:root:Check your device configuration and try again
INFO:root:
INFO:root:-------------------- Test Run Number 1 --------------------
ERROR:root:Detected link speed (1000) is lower than detected max speed (10000)
ERROR:root:Check your device configuration and try again

This repeating error goes on for quite a while, which both pointlessly extends test time and creates a very verbose attachment that provides very little real information. (This example is taken from https://certification.canonical.com/hardware/201309-14182/submission/119573/test/64027/result/8817033/.) Two possible better ways to handle this would be:

* Stop the test as soon as an under-speed link is detected. After
  all, it's not likely to get better while the test is running.
* Go ahead and run the test despite the under-speed link. The
  test is virtually certain to fail, but at least we'll get
  some data. This might be acceptable on, say, a 40 Gbps link
  detected when a 56 Gbps link is theoretically possible; we
  could attach a note saying that the device was tested at
  40 Gbps rather than the theoretical maximum of 56 Gbps.

Revision history for this message
Jeff Lane  (bladernr) wrote :

You should also probably look at this one as well:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/plainbox-provider-checkbox/+bug/1695922

I filed that this morning after a discussion with Lenovo.

Revision history for this message
Jeff Lane  (bladernr) wrote :

To blend the two, My suggestion would be:

1: Stop the test and fail it (so we don't miss it in the noise of the output from the script).
2: Add an option to override the speed check and run the script manually in these cases
2a: if this becomes an issue for regression testing, we can create a separate regression whitelist and include jobs to work around issues like this.
3: Note certificates in some manner in these cases

Rod Smith (rodsmith)
Changed in plainbox-provider-checkbox:
assignee: nobody → Rod Smith (rodsmith)
status: New → In Progress
Revision history for this message
Rod Smith (rodsmith) wrote :

I've followed your suggestion in my merge request, Jeff. My MR does not create a separate whitelist to pass the new --underspeed-ok option, though; we can add that later if it seems desirable.

Jeff Lane  (bladernr)
Changed in plainbox-provider-checkbox:
status: In Progress → Fix Committed
milestone: none → future
Jeff Lane  (bladernr)
Changed in plainbox-provider-checkbox:
importance: Undecided → High
Changed in plainbox-provider-checkbox:
milestone: future → 0.37.0
Changed in plainbox-provider-checkbox:
status: Fix Committed → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Duplicates of this bug

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.