llvm dev - Jun 2020 - pre-merge checks are switching to buildkite build system

Hello friends,

We are switching the pre-merge test build system from Jenkins to Buildkite.
That will give authors and reviewers more transparency on what's going on
during the build process. For now only members of "pre-merge beta
testing"
[0] group are affected.

As usual, please tell us if something is off.

[0] https://reviews.llvm.org/project/view/78/

Kind regards,
Mikhail
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200603/84a1d158/attachment.html>

Mikhail

Firstly let me say that I love the pre-merge checks...but I recently saw
something a little odd

A recent change I made  to clang-format failed the pre-merge checks

https://results.llvm-merge-guard.org/BETA_amd64_debian_testing_clang8-1980/summary.html


This was because as part of the revision I clang-formatted one of the files
with a build of clang-format that contained the fix I was making.

https://reviews.llvm.org/D80950

i.e. I was making a change to not just break between   "XXX" <<
"XXX" just
because it was 2 strings either side of "<<" and included as way
of a
demonstration the one other file in lib/Format that violated that rule
(because we keep lib/Format 100% clang-format clean)

The failure from the pre-merge check was: (clang-format.patch)

diff --git clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
index 9c25e107d44..b8da2c23b55 100644
--- clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
+++ clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
@@ -2744 +2744,2 @@ LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED static void printDebugInfo(const
UnwrappedLine &Line,
-    llvm::dbgs() << I->Tok->Tok.getName() << "["
<< "T=" <<
I->Tok->getType()
+    llvm::dbgs() << I->Tok->Tok.getName() << "["
+                 << "T=" << I->Tok->getType()

 Reading the documentation for the pre-merge checks it says this...

Linux

   1. Checkout of the branch (from apply patch)
   2. Guess which projects were modified, run Cmake for those.
   3. Build the binaries -- ninja all
   4. Run the test suite -- ninja check-all
   5. Run clang-format and clang-tidy on the diff.
   6. Upload build results to Phabricator


However could you clarify: if step v.
>  Run clang-format and clang-tidy on the diff.
Uses the clang-format/clang-tidy binaries either

a) built at step iii. or
b) if you use a pre-existing version?

If b) which version do you use?

a) last successful built
b) tip of existing committed master
c) last released version.

Many thank in advance

MyDeveloperDay.




On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 1:40 PM Mikhail Goncharov via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hello friends,
>
> We are switching the pre-merge test build system from Jenkins to Buildkite.
> That will give authors and reviewers more transparency on what's going
on
> during the build process. For now only members of "pre-merge beta
testing"
> [0] group are affected.
>
> As usual, please tell us if something is off.
>
> [0] https://reviews.llvm.org/project/view/78/
>
> Kind regards,
> Mikhail
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200603/ea1b55b3/attachment.html>

Hi MyDeveloperDay,

We are using the released version of clang-format / clang-tidy (not
necessarily the latest release). I think it makes sense to use most recent
versions of the tools:
https://github.com/google/llvm-premerge-checks/issues/196

Kind regards,
Mikhail


On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 3:40 PM MyDeveloper Day <mydeveloperday at
gmail.com>
wrote:
> Mikhail
>
> Firstly let me say that I love the pre-merge checks...but I recently saw
> something a little odd
>
> A recent change I made  to clang-format failed the pre-merge checks
>
>
>
https://results.llvm-merge-guard.org/BETA_amd64_debian_testing_clang8-1980/summary.html
>
>
> This was because as part of the revision I clang-formatted one of the
> files with a build of clang-format that contained the fix I was making.
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D80950
>
> i.e. I was making a change to not just break between   "XXX"
<< "XXX" just
> because it was 2 strings either side of "<<" and included
as way of a
> demonstration the one other file in lib/Format that violated that rule
> (because we keep lib/Format 100% clang-format clean)
>
> The failure from the pre-merge check was: (clang-format.patch)
>
> diff --git clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
> clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
> index 9c25e107d44..b8da2c23b55 100644
> --- clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
> +++ clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
> @@ -2744 +2744,2 @@ LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED static void printDebugInfo(const
> UnwrappedLine &Line,
> -    llvm::dbgs() << I->Tok->Tok.getName() <<
"[" << "T=" <<
> I->Tok->getType()
> +    llvm::dbgs() << I->Tok->Tok.getName() <<
"["
> +                 << "T=" << I->Tok->getType()
>
>  Reading the documentation for the pre-merge checks it says this...
>
> Linux
>
>    1. Checkout of the branch (from apply patch)
>    2. Guess which projects were modified, run Cmake for those.
>    3. Build the binaries -- ninja all
>    4. Run the test suite -- ninja check-all
>    5. Run clang-format and clang-tidy on the diff.
>    6. Upload build results to Phabricator
>
>
> However could you clarify: if step v.
>
> >  Run clang-format and clang-tidy on the diff.
>
> Uses the clang-format/clang-tidy binaries either
>
> a) built at step iii. or
> b) if you use a pre-existing version?
>
> If b) which version do you use?
>
> a) last successful built
> b) tip of existing committed master
> c) last released version.
>
> Many thank in advance
>
> MyDeveloperDay.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 1:40 PM Mikhail Goncharov via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello friends,
>>
>> We are switching the pre-merge test build system from Jenkins to
>> Buildkite.
>> That will give authors and reviewers more transparency on what's
going on
>> during the build process. For now only members of "pre-merge beta
testing"
>> [0] group are affected.
>>
>> As usual, please tell us if something is off.
>>
>> [0] https://reviews.llvm.org/project/view/78/
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Mikhail
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200604/b5032d11/attachment.html>

We have not noticed any significant issues with Buildkite migration and now
ALL pre-merge checks for diff reviews are running on Buildkite!

Kind regards,
Mikhail


On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 2:40 PM Mikhail Goncharov <goncharov at google.com>
wrote:
> Hello friends,
>
> We are switching the pre-merge test build system from Jenkins to Buildkite.
> That will give authors and reviewers more transparency on what's going
on
> during the build process. For now only members of "pre-merge beta
testing"
> [0] group are affected.
>
> As usual, please tell us if something is off.
>
> [0] https://reviews.llvm.org/project/view/78/
>
> Kind regards,
> Mikhail
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200616/f8d06341/attachment.html>