Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

x/build: bot netbsd-arm-bsiegert--rpi3 reported as broken #71972

Closed
gopherbot opened this issue Feb 26, 2025 · 5 comments
Closed

x/build: bot netbsd-arm-bsiegert--rpi3 reported as broken #71972

gopherbot opened this issue Feb 26, 2025 · 5 comments
Assignees
Labels
Builders x/build issues (builders, bots, dashboards) NeedsInvestigation Someone must examine and confirm this is a valid issue and not a duplicate of an existing one.
Milestone

Comments

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

The bot netbsd-arm-bsiegert--rpi3 has been reported as broken. It is currently in "dead" state. Please work to resolve the issue.

@golang/netbsd
@golang/arm

watchflakes

@gopherbot gopherbot added Builders x/build issues (builders, bots, dashboards) NeedsInvestigation Someone must examine and confirm this is a valid issue and not a duplicate of an existing one. labels Feb 26, 2025
@gopherbot gopherbot added this to the Unreleased milestone Feb 26, 2025
@cagedmantis
Copy link
Contributor

@bsiegert

@bsiegert bsiegert self-assigned this Feb 26, 2025
@bsiegert
Copy link
Contributor

The bot has been pretty unstable as of late, I have been rebooting it when it hangs. That said, this is the first time that gopherbot filed an issue. Is this a new functionality?

FWIW, the machine is rebooted and working again.

@cagedmantis
Copy link
Contributor

@bsiegert Yes, we are trying out a new automated broken bot detection system. Any feedback provided on the system would be appreciated.

@bsiegert
Copy link
Contributor

@cagedmantis It would be nice if I could opt out of these for the netbsd-arm builders specifically. Both machines are pretty unstable at the moment. I have separate monitoring alerting me that they need to be rebooted, so these are a bit redundant.

In general, the idea is good though!

@cagedmantis
Copy link
Contributor

@bsiegert Thanks for the feedback. I think the current scanning algorithm is a bit sensitive. I plan on changing it so that if a machine is in a bad state for 24 hours (or some other sane amount of time) then it will create an issue. That would probably reduce the noise for unstable bots. Does that sound like a good compromise? We also want to exclude bots that have a known issue from having issues created for them. Would that suffice or would you still rather have them excluded for now?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Builders x/build issues (builders, bots, dashboards) NeedsInvestigation Someone must examine and confirm this is a valid issue and not a duplicate of an existing one.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants