From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EDA01F62E for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2019 23:14:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730997AbfAOXOB (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jan 2019 18:14:01 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com ([209.85.221.66]:33737 "EHLO mail-wr1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728858AbfAOXOA (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jan 2019 18:14:00 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id c14so4937487wrr.0 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:13:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=a7OHkPhqLIWtxTINGMTAOfQUknr6N7ZDpR8CUeEG5Ik=; b=Q1gF9HUF2RwXhLtsJQL4vuXkmydp33WziXvk+hXyxdDGuqh2BIsOmUHSVa9iq0FZKA xYYzM1tI+naHnqP9a7fOum7kQxeoyvcZZarN+f9m322WrK87L21HTVHbihN3P49QEnGj DyXiD7zeNoJxZLjBHa4QkrELjtXLOgdHKb7dkbQridYvf4yhPCvp2u1vFJGcY1yMfpou obfpwGuRP8tF2UkBlovA31791D6mWbw04TCJ0NNfpy5NO1HzV3dYBhWYMDH27QfSxh2Y Hik8X7ORbgVM5+YsstFPpQ1RL33ZAixxesiwYwCfE9KPuVkRSwRf01jyEh1NtCBKeJMR LUng== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=a7OHkPhqLIWtxTINGMTAOfQUknr6N7ZDpR8CUeEG5Ik=; b=UdVb9/dGYFUL0cNxLiTyfmoqM9SIw5iF8Cc67PPtrZu9cUZ1uYEGt7uX2ZL7L1hM4M PROghwf5S/bN1+RwXp5eD+QCQUD9HssVyKjDaPzdaLawVp+UG3ZQii+tc4E0cAkyihf5 cc5HTQRMGos5ANyHvafpEZzfQH8fjYe0KhldUBhYGX3DlPB9BerF3muG/mKs2uI/kBfT 6bmcQZ3s0hDQuGCFglC4FNVsEYSfb2uiapTwCpDVNnBDDqd/s2gvtS388ejJyDWaNulX 63fxRamP+OIJ87E64JyCQL4B79GKWfHxVmbH2i+GFVdRTSgRh79vDy+xtgnEfUo/vSe7 XY2w== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdiMJzz/qKhlbQjf2Yqb0UBuYaNYaZWhxf9MYOmDQCDLqK65HGN OLY1l9fCRJdHhdtm6BhWTFeNM3+Q X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7EiE/vEhgFEXFUSCqfJr6W6kqgsW2VoTO2zB/vOkrZBCkJ37XAOYQCtR5gwj/vKK7QHEpDTA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:afdc:: with SMTP id y28mr4828429wrd.275.1547594038562; Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:13:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (168.50.187.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.187.50.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o15sm63099848wrp.12.2019.01.15.15.13.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:13:57 -0800 (PST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jonathan Tan Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Sideband the whole fetch v2 response References: <20190115230239.57954-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:13:57 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20190115230239.57954-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> (Jonathan Tan's message of "Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:02:39 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jonathan Tan writes: >> Jonathan Tan writes: >> >> >> Jonathan Tan writes: >> >> >> >> > Like v1, this is on origin/ms/packet-err-check. >> >> >> >> By the way, when merged to 'pu' as one of the earlier topic, t5409 >> >> starts to fail under --stress. >> >> >> >> $ git checkout 'origin/pu^{/^Merge branch .jt/fetch-v2-sideband}' >> >> $ make >> >> $ cd t && sh ./t5409-col*.sh --stress >> >> >> >> This is not new to this round; v1 exhibited the same symptom. >> >> >> >> Thanks. >> > >> > Thanks for checking. I don't think this branch is the cause of this >> > issue, though. I ran the same stress test on both: >> > >> > - f3035d003e ("Merge branch 'sg/stress-test' into jch", 2019-01-14) and >> > - the result of merging sg/stress-test into master, >> > >> > and the test fails with the same result. >> >> Interesting. That is not what I am seeing (as I manually bisected >> the first-parent chain between f3035d003e and the tip of pu). > > Ah...yes, you're right. I forgot to build before running the tests. I'll > take a look. Thanks.