From owner-freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Tue Mar 26 14:10:22 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-testing@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93D2C155433E for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 14:10:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kevans@freebsd.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECB9A6D7BC; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 14:10:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kevans@freebsd.org) Received: from mail-lj1-f178.google.com (mail-lj1-f178.google.com [209.85.208.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) (Authenticated sender: kevans) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E9E6978E; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 14:10:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kevans@freebsd.org) Received: by mail-lj1-f178.google.com with SMTP id k8so11237315lja.8; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:10:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXZ80ietWomvoy/64UpQ6uP0VPV4fy9EmPEpM7fEaxF8X5FTCtc 82ETv2SoIJ2oYaq7j76A+J3dWKkP3LsWlOqBSNQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxa/dtG3ksGnWSw0AjYSvNzcMMJ79cYPopd/CZRVnFV7H4rWyhy9jEYHggEFOUtwGy63RxdlH7TYeONG+r0l38= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9c09:: with SMTP id s9mr16517364lji.83.1553609420276; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:10:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <41F71A29-A934-408D-B57D-844EB4BC3C83@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <41F71A29-A934-408D-B57D-844EB4BC3C83@gmail.com> From: Kyle Evans Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 09:10:07 -0500 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: FreeBSD CI Weekly Report 2019-03-24 To: Enji Cooper Cc: Kyle Evans , Li-Wen Hsu , freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: ECB9A6D7BC X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.95 / 15.00]; local_wl_from(0.00)[freebsd.org]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.95)[-0.952,0]; ASN(0.00)[asn:11403, ipnet:96.47.64.0/20, country:US] X-BeenThere: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Testing on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 14:10:22 -0000 On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 9:05 AM Enji Cooper wrote: > > > > On Mar 26, 2019, at 04:51, Kyle Evans wrote: > > ... > > > The lib.libc.regex.exhaust_test.regcomp_too_big failure should be > > fixed by r345516 pulling in an rlimit bump from upstream. They didn't > > adjust the test metadata though -- it previously reflected a memory > > requirement of 64M, which matched the rlimit imposed. I would expect > > that needs increased if we're exhausting 64M like we were on some > > systems, but I'm unsure if we should just bump that sucker to 256M or > > try to find an intermediate that's sufficient. I suspect the 256M bump > > wasn't a measurement of usage. > > > >> [... snip ...] > > Memory serves me correctly, it used to time out with this value before, w= hich is why pho@ and I lowered the limit to 64MB (I think we added the setr= limit call). > > I=E2=80=99ll have to go back and refresh my memory, since this was 3-4 ye= ars ago. > Looking back at the NetBSD history, I do see that you upstreamed the 64M limit and dropped the requirements from 120M to 64M in the metadata. =3D-( Apologies for not researching that more closely- I had only seen that they upped the setrlimit ~two weeks ago and assumed it was safe at this point.