llvm dev - Aug 2015 - buildbot failure in LLVM on clang-native-arm-cortex-a9

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 26 August 2015 at 17:27, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es>
wrote:
> > @Galina: It seems this bot is now almost permanently running into a
> > compile-time
> > timeout. Maybe you can fix this by either increasing the timeout or by
> > switching to a cmake/ninja based build as suggested by Renato.
>
> How I fixed my bots:
>
> 1. Remove cmake and ninja from your system. They are too old.
> 2. Download cmake stable sources (3.2+), untar, bootstrap, make, make
> install
> 3. Checkout ninja from github, bootstrap, copy "ninja" to
/usr/local/bin
> 4. Install ccache from packages, add ccache to path
> 5. Change the builder to ClangCMakeBuilder like all ARM and AArch64 bots
> now in.
> 6. Restart.
>
> The Ninja+CMake combo has a feature that makes sure you print
> everything without buffering, so the time out works exactly as
> intended: if any single process takes more than that time, it's a bug.
>
> I'm copying Gabor, as AFAIK, his bot is not based on the new
> CMake+Ninja fix, but on an old polling script we had, which makes
> timeouts useless.
>
> Let's try this one first, and only consider any more drastic solution
> after.
>
*shrug* I haven't looked at whatever specific bots are under discussion,
but I really wouldn't mind/would like if the bots had a more "revert to
green" feel to them just like we have for commits: take a bot offline,
fix/iterate/improve it, see if it comes good, then bring it back to the
mainline.

>
> cheers,
> --renato
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://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/20150826/b7ad08d6/attachment.html>

On 26 August 2015 at 17:39, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>
wrote:
> *shrug* I haven't looked at whatever specific bots are under
discussion, but
> I really wouldn't mind/would like if the bots had a more "revert
to green"
> feel to them just like we have for commits: take a bot offline,
> fix/iterate/improve it, see if it comes good, then bring it back to the
> mainline.
One needs a local buildmaster (which I recommend to all bot owners),
but might not be trivial.

But I totally agree with this policy. You have my vote. Now, we only
have to decide how to make each individual decision as a community.

--renato

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
wrote:
> On 26 August 2015 at 17:39, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>
wrote:
> > *shrug* I haven't looked at whatever specific bots are under
discussion,
> but
> > I really wouldn't mind/would like if the bots had a more
"revert to
> green"
> > feel to them just like we have for commits: take a bot offline,
> > fix/iterate/improve it, see if it comes good, then bring it back to
the
> > mainline.
>
> One needs a local buildmaster (which I recommend to all bot owners),
> but might not be trivial.
>
I wouldn't mind having a separate official build master (we could have a
separate group on the main buildmaster, but I think that's insufficient -
the visual noise there is still problematic) that hosts experimental bots.

>
> But I totally agree with this policy. You have my vote. Now, we only
> have to decide how to make each individual decision as a community.
>
> --renato
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150826/0f11d0eb/attachment.html>