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

On 08/26/2015 09:46 AM, Philip Reames wrote:
> On 08/26/2015 09:41 AM, David Blaikie via llvm-dev wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Renato Golin 
>> <renato.golin at linaro.org <mailto:renato.golin at
linaro.org>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 26 August 2015 at 17:39, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com
>>     <mailto: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.
> +1.  I think this would be a very workable solution.
>
> Since we three seem to now be in agreement, do we want to send a top 
> level RFC and actually implement this?
Also, someone more familiar with the buildbot setup would need to write 
some clear instructions on how to do this "revert" of a bot.
Personally,
I've never touched this area and would have no idea how to even do
this.
>>
>>
>>     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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20150826/07df95ce/attachment.html>

On 08/26/2015 06:48 PM, Philip Reames wrote:
> On 08/26/2015 09:46 AM, Philip Reames wrote:
>> On 08/26/2015 09:41 AM, David Blaikie via llvm-dev wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at
linaro.org <mailto:renato.golin at linaro.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     On 26 August 2015 at 17:39, David Blaikie <dblaikie at
gmail.com <mailto: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.
>> +1.  I think this would be a very workable solution.
>>
>> Since we three seem to now be in agreement, do we want to send a top
level RFC and actually implement this?
> Also, someone more familiar with the buildbot setup would need to write
some clear instructions on how to do this "revert" of a bot.
Personally, I've never touched this area and would have no idea how to even
do this.
Reverting is simple. You just comment out the bot in
zorg/buildbot/llvmlab/master/config/builders.py,
but you need to notify Galina to trigger a builbot restart. So there is one day
latency.

So just reverting buildbots needs some time. I generally try to inform the
owner. If the bot is red for two days,
I disable it and inform the mailing list. (This does not happen very often).

Tobias

On 26 August 2015 at 17:55, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es>
wrote:
> Reverting is simple. You just comment out the bot in
> zorg/buildbot/llvmlab/master/config/builders.py,
> but you need to notify Galina to trigger a builbot restart. So there is one
> day latency.
This should never be a first action. Only if the owner is not
responsive for days.

Reverting a bot (or moving it to the experimental set) should be a bot
owner's responsibility, well delineated in the documentation.

Only if the owner doesn't care about his/her bot, the community
overrules and disable the bot on the master.

Restarting the master disrupt testing almost as much as breaking bots,
but with all of them failing at the same time. It is a
disproportionate action before the owner has any chance to reply.

The world is round, working hours and weekends are at slightly
different times, and people sometimes take holidays. If we don't give
at least a few days to do something *that* drastic, we'll upset our
testing beyond recognition, and people will give up on being bot
owners. We do not want that.

cheers,
--renato