1101306 - try running android x86 emulator tests on aws

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Infrastructure & Operations Graveyard :: CIDuty, task)

Description

[Kim Moir [:kmoir] ET]

In the interest of running more tests in the cloud, we should try to run Android x86 on AWS instances.  Notes from Armen re why they run on ix

---

The only note that I find is that we were having some issues about OpenGL:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=895186#c3

Beyond that I don't know more. Maybe gbrown or ctalbert know.

In any case it might be good to disable S1, S2 & S3 until x86 becomes and
official tier-1 product.

Comment 1

[Kim Moir [:kmoir] ET]

Attachment: emulator.log

Failed running opengl tests, upgraded instance to c3.xlarge and trying that now.

Comment 2

[Kim Moir [:kmoir] ET]

No, same issue on c3.xlarge. So closing for now, perhaps will revisit later on and investigate root cause.  Right now it can continue to run on ix.

Comment 3

[Kim Moir [:kmoir] ET]

It would be good to split out the tests to so we could run ones that can run on AWS there and run the remaining ones on ix

Comment 4

[Geoff Brown [:gbrown]]

Another thing to watch out for is performance. We get fantastic performance on ix with kvm -- see bug 928463.

Comment 5

[Kim Moir [:kmoir] ET]

Right, I can see that the qemu-kvm packages are not installed on the aws instances but they are on the ix machines.  (I misinterpreted the earlier error message when running the scripts and now see that the missing kvm packages are a problem).  In any case, I was doing some reading today and it seems that kvm doensn't run on AWS because it's XEN based...gbrown is that your understanding too?

Comment 6

[Geoff Brown [:gbrown]]

Yes, that's my understanding (but I am not 100% sure).

Comment 7

[Kim Moir [:kmoir] ET]

So I looked at this bug in a bit more detail
It seems we would need another emulator image to run it without kvm and according to ateam this would slow things down.  So not sure it is worth pursuing.

As an aside, only set 4 is enabled currently, contrary to the remarks in comment 1