From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id ANL0EKI4V18QewAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 07:54:10 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id IM7wDKI4V19dfAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 07:54:10 +0000 Received: from mail.notmuchmail.org (nmbug.tethera.net [IPv6:2607:5300:201:3100::1657]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A09AD9404C5 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 07:54:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nmbug.tethera.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.notmuchmail.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75F082931A; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 03:53:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mout02.posteo.de (mout02.posteo.de [185.67.36.66]) by mail.notmuchmail.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC1842062D for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 03:53:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5EF592400FE for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 09:53:52 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1599551632; bh=nCllOySZS3udjOQmBXZlpF3ytqMIojWFVdceNzqUbGc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=XZ8oEn+cvoojp+T1vmdyrPmKC6z7zDeZLvoGGmTCDFWzj6ACHdf2tXyqzLv8lUqOW 7yc1wP8FhG+TCLJir1TzRLPcwaxOSmlB+pnA8fXx6upG043mXv9deA+tEamUbxvIF0 szLUO8BLqxUiJcy0QYTpFDkSKE0nCHNuLkzMDZgpvcqq+F/rc+n3FxbVIwTdASjHcd 5xSSRIyG5lyewBcNqX8zs7zb9KO9x5QsSS9m9dHQJZod29yj5sBhRDrJeJNBlTgk7u 1BGAaw9kst/MgXvluExpo8h2ddK3awUFdra4z+YtZ0pwjCKEf4Qbali8YZQlBmdzMc +6HFPLQIIekpw== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4Bly8C67Bgz6tmM; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 09:53:47 +0200 (CEST) From: Dan =?utf-8?B?xIxlcm3DoWs=?= To: David Bremner Subject: Re: Last call for NEWS entries for 0.31 In-Reply-To: <87363uhvxq.fsf@cgc-instruments.com> References: <87lfiehb92.fsf@tethera.net> <874kp0gpnr.fsf@tethera.net> <871rk4gosx.fsf@tethera.net> <87k0xqg7c7.fsf@tethera.net> <874kol7i3b.fsf@tethera.net> <87pn785pvr.fsf@tethera.net> <877dtd7w3g.fsf@cgc-instruments.com> <87o8mpr5w6.fsf@tethera.net> <87363uhvxq.fsf@cgc-instruments.com> Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2020 09:53:36 +0200 Message-ID: <87bligd7r3.fsf@cgc-instruments.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID-Hash: AVF7Q6EPSFFLHVZZBYTPT2X6ST7D6MZO X-Message-ID-Hash: AVF7Q6EPSFFLHVZZBYTPT2X6ST7D6MZO X-MailFrom: dan.cermak@posteo.net X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-notmuch.notmuchmail.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; suspicious-header CC: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 3.2.1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7388545103276878765==" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (body hash did not verify) header.d=posteo.net header.s=2017 header.b=XZ8oEn+c; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (strict)" header.from=posteo.net (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of notmuch-bounces@notmuchmail.org designates 2607:5300:201:3100::1657 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=notmuch-bounces@notmuchmail.org X-Spam-Score: -0.47 X-TUID: zmj5bzke4YL+ --===============7388545103276878765== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dan =C4=8Cerm=C3=A1k writes: > David Bremner writes: > >> Dan =C4=8Cerm=C3=A1k writes: >> >>> Hi David, >>> >>> David Bremner writes: >>> >>> I have started seeing consistent test failures with rc2 on ppc64 and >>> ppc64le: >>> - on both platforms "get total messages with closed database" from >>> T568-lib-thread fails >> >> I don't see this failure on ppc64el on Debian [0]. Perhaps there is some >> toolchain difference? > > This specific issue has now disappeared on both ppc64 and ppc64el, so I > guess it was just some toolchain breakage that got fixed in the > meantime. I was wrong, "get total messages with closed database" from T568-lib-thread still fails sometimes on ppc64, but unfortunately not consistently. It appears to mostly fail on a worker with relatively little memory (3584 MB vs 8192 MB or 11264MB). I'll try to keep an eye out on that hoping to find some indicator what could be wrong. Cheers, Dan --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJKBAEBCAA0FiEE/2KDnDCX6+IOiSay5jLDOAYQ0cUFAl9XOIAWHGRhbi5jZXJt YWtAcG9zdGVvLm5ldAAKCRDmMsM4BhDRxfvxD/9wS92CpHDd2wFEG1pRE7gME3rq TBwW1lRfGgJkoBQm3KlaCrfgdTu/iZZN2RvDFrqo6cYHSahF/Kdo6tyujKSbJwwd Gnot1fmr6HWg9HCgMs24Ujqcbp85IFmAeuEK9xGSfW2/7yh8vqxhMTyW7scSOd90 1Ge5/h3PP3Hel7IbSGoXJ+mNL/LPVVK8vkjEGqJnKd4mC6AzVaYA7QDzjLJ3U2vw NM4e8684BNjuX5BCpuW4SwP/79qCzlnXpSd/O15xExPRjp7uhzI0HKKZuegAWRl6 vyPuZUvt1ge2fbcnxYUB6js5kqbQmze7ejgq+3JSPC4hRBEN+WsGf96ydmWxu030 nAufHvXFhGTtPwGP+at6KtOUb/5RbhtkMWvaPzDM3vmWgBRfCkl+QuC1tWXtZM82 I/aUEsVQkr0IUH62FJ7qMFn73+VZDpYiMAb6gsB3X8bu+lzZBzq4BHeN7pUwk6nd Q25Ws9nLlcQ8SJVSk5tzuJ1L/Ir3379Nt1L42fNyZsUScZJe8ml1Ugq5gYBDA5uc Fu4oVEArpEksQaVkNkHaSiVs90OxrUvPUWtLg0A4e56EnJ3xvbKJKKPzmHQ3Zlge B2IQwQ4Vgcu/ghVDwBUW7nqL+5I+6/NRTsIx2lR5ZFM4wEnJpw+bZXAKzCW5mBgW 0j5eX0SKcoYChuloog== =eeGJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- --===============7388545103276878765== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline --===============7388545103276878765==--