Daniel Sanders via llvm-dev
2015-Nov-03 13:30 UTC
[llvm-dev] Revisions that cause buildbot problems but aren't on blame lists
Hi Galina, The failing build was http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-mips/builds/10220 and the commit that caused it was 'r251331 [compiler-rt] Fix ptrace interceptor for aarch64'. ________________________________ From: Galina Kistanova [gkistanova at gmail.com] Sent: 02 November 2015 16:03 To: Daniel Sanders Cc: Renato Golin; Bill Seurer; LLVM Dev Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Revisions that cause buildbot problems but aren't on blame lists Hello Bill, Daniel, Could you point me to the exact build and tell me the correct revision to blame, please? Most likely, this means that your bot defines wrong dependencies. I can look in to this, once I'll learn the details. Thanks Galina On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Daniel Sanders via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: Hi, I've had this problem on a compiler-rt change too. It was on the clang-cmake-mips builder earlier this week. ________________________________________ From: llvm-dev [llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org>] on behalf of Renato Golin via llvm-dev [llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>] Sent: 30 October 2015 08:34 To: Bill Seurer Cc: LLVM Dev Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Revisions that cause buildbot problems but aren't on blame lists On 30 October 2015 at 14:48, Bill Seurer via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:> It appears this happens when (for instance) one of the test cases in > projects/test-suite is updated and causes a failure. Such a revision also > won't kick off a new test cycle.Hi Bill, This is a known issue, and maybe we should look into that, now that the two other critical issues (silent master and ignoring exceptions) are done. Another repository that has the same effect is Zorg (the bot infrastructure). Galina, First, the easy one: I think we should include Zorg on *all* monitors. The not so easy one: I believe this is just a matter of creating a monitor based on the test-suite, and put all test-suite bots checking on it too. But from what I remember, you can only create lists of monitors, not necessarily collate them per bot. Is that true? cheers, --renato _______________________________________________ LLVM Developers mailing list llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev _______________________________________________ LLVM Developers mailing list llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto: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/20151103/88bcac2c/attachment.html>
Renato Golin via llvm-dev
2015-Nov-03 13:38 UTC
[llvm-dev] Revisions that cause buildbot problems but aren't on blame lists
On 3 November 2015 at 13:30, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> wrote:> Hi Galina, > > The failing build was > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-mips/builds/10220 and the > commit that caused it was 'r251331 [compiler-rt] Fix ptrace interceptor for > aarch64'.Adhemerval, Can you have a look?
Daniel Sanders via llvm-dev
2015-Nov-03 13:43 UTC
[llvm-dev] Revisions that cause buildbot problems but aren't on blame lists
> -----Original Message----- > From: Renato Golin [mailto:renato.golin at linaro.org] > Sent: 03 November 2015 13:39 > To: Daniel Sanders; Adhemerval Zanella > Cc: Galina Kistanova; Bill Seurer; LLVM Dev > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Revisions that cause buildbot problems but aren't on > blame lists > > On 3 November 2015 at 13:30, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> > wrote: > > Hi Galina, > > > > The failing build was > > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-mips/builds/10220 and the > > commit that caused it was 'r251331 [compiler-rt] Fix ptrace interceptor for > > aarch64'. > > Adhemerval, > > Can you have a look?I already have a fix for the problem, we just have some definitions in odd places. I XFAIL'd it while I was in the US but I'll commit the fix shortly.