[release-4.12] OCPBUGS-5531: Skip offline multiple ranges test if number of cores less than 20 #543
Conversation
… cpu siblings Minor fix to GetCpuSiblings function to use core as key instead of cpu siblings Signed-off-by: Niranjan M.R <mrniranjan@redhat.com>
|
@openshift-cherrypick-robot: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-5529 has been cloned as Jira Issue OCPBUGS-5531. Retitling PR to link against new bug. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
openshift-ci
bot
changed the title
|
@openshift-cherrypick-robot: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
openshift-ci-robot
added
jira/severity-low
|
@openshift-cherrypick-robot: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-5531, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. 6 validation(s) were run on this bug
No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Jira (nkononov@redhat.com), skipping review request. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/approve |
Seems like the approval is not properly working due to the change of account name maybe? |
aye. My approval rights are removed until (if?) #542 merges. |
|
/test e2e-gcp-pao |
|
/approve |
|
/retest |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ffromani, openshift-cherrypick-robot, yanirq The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
|
/label backport-risk-assessed |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
backport-risk-assessed
|
/label cherry-pick-approved |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
cherry-pick-approved
|
/lgtm |
| @@ -434,7 +434,7 @@ func GetCpuSiblings(numaCoreSiblings map[int]map[int][]int, coreKey int) []strin | |||
| for key := range numaCoreSiblings { | |||
| for _, c := range numaCoreSiblings[key][coreKey] { | |||
| cpuSiblings = append(cpuSiblings, strconv.Itoa(c)) | |||
| delete(numaCoreSiblings[key], c) | |||
| delete(numaCoreSiblings[key], coreKey) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Uh? I can't quite understand this change. You are deleting the very item you iterate over.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The numacoresiblings map is of [numa-Node][core][siblings]
The reason is we are using the same map to get reserved , isolated and offline cpus . So once we use cpus for lets say reserved, we delete the core id's from which we picked the siblings so that when we use the map for lets say offline cpus, we want to iterate with what is left so that reserved, offline don't end having same cpu siblings.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But why do you iterate over for _, c := range numaCoreSiblings[key][coreKey] then? You only do one loop and then delete the whole core.
Shouldn't the delete be ouside of the loop?
|
@openshift-cherrypick-robot: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
@openshift-cherrypick-robot: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-5531 is in an unrecognized state (ON_QA) and will not be moved to the MODIFIED state. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
This is an automated cherry-pick of #537
/assign mrniranjan