How is XRay tested? IIRC, Renato didn't see any test failures on ARM? Merging sounds reasonbaly, I'd just like to understand what's the risk for the branch. On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> wrote:> Hans, these changes reached trunk in https://reviews.llvm.org/rL292516 and > https://reviews.llvm.org/rL292517 . Could you look? > > On 26 January 2017 at 03:29, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Sorry, I initially included LLVM-Commits rather than LLVM-Dev. Fixed. >> >> On 26 January 2017 at 03:26, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Dean, Renato, >>> >>> AFAIK, unfortunately, these critical Arm32 XRay fixes are not yet in 4.0: >>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D28624 , https://reviews.llvm.org/D28623 . The >>> first repairs XRay instrumentation map emission. Without this map XRay >>> doesn't work at all: the runtime doesn't see anything to instrument. The >>> second fixes the CPU cache incoherency problem. Without this patch, XRay >>> will intermittently fail to patch or unpatch some sleds (depending on >>> whether their code is in CPU cache or not). >>> >>> Is there any chance we can get these patches to 4.0? This page >>> http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html#release-patch-rules says that >>> "release manager, the official release testers or the code owners" may >>> approve cherry-picking to release branch from trunk. AFAIK, you are code >>> owners for XRay and ARM. I don't know who are the release manager or >>> official release testers. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Serge >> >> >
XRay is tested automatically on build-bots with tests in LLVM and compiler-rt . Or are you asking for manual testing instructions? Of these 2 patches, the compiler-rt patch depends on LLVM patch because the tests compiler-rt\test\xray\TestCases\Linux would fail without the fix in LLVM. The compiler-rt patch also enables the tests which were occasionally disabled. The XRay feature is quite isolated, so side-effects are not expected. I can only see a risk that some commit I took for granted when making&testing the fixes, somehow didn't get to 4.0 branch. On 26 January 2017 at 21:44, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote:> How is XRay tested? IIRC, Renato didn't see any test failures on ARM? > > Merging sounds reasonbaly, I'd just like to understand what's the risk > for the branch. > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hans, these changes reached trunk in https://reviews.llvm.org/rL292516 > and > > https://reviews.llvm.org/rL292517 . Could you look? > > > > On 26 January 2017 at 03:29, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Sorry, I initially included LLVM-Commits rather than LLVM-Dev. Fixed. > >> > >> On 26 January 2017 at 03:26, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Dean, Renato, > >>> > >>> AFAIK, unfortunately, these critical Arm32 XRay fixes are not yet in > 4.0: > >>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D28624 , https://reviews.llvm.org/D28623 . > The > >>> first repairs XRay instrumentation map emission. Without this map XRay > >>> doesn't work at all: the runtime doesn't see anything to instrument. > The > >>> second fixes the CPU cache incoherency problem. Without this patch, > XRay > >>> will intermittently fail to patch or unpatch some sleds (depending on > >>> whether their code is in CPU cache or not). > >>> > >>> Is there any chance we can get these patches to 4.0? This page > >>> http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html#release-patch-rules says > that > >>> "release manager, the official release testers or the code owners" may > >>> approve cherry-picking to release branch from trunk. AFAIK, you are > code > >>> owners for XRay and ARM. I don't know who are the release manager or > >>> official release testers. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Serge > >> > >> > > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170126/e3ac271b/attachment.html>
I'm wondering why the lit tests didn't catch this as part of testing rc1 on ARM. On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> wrote:> XRay is tested automatically on build-bots with tests in LLVM and > compiler-rt . Or are you asking for manual testing instructions? > Of these 2 patches, the compiler-rt patch depends on LLVM patch because the > tests compiler-rt\test\xray\TestCases\Linux would fail without the fix in > LLVM. The compiler-rt patch also enables the tests which were occasionally > disabled. > > The XRay feature is quite isolated, so side-effects are not expected. I can > only see a risk that some commit I took for granted when making&testing the > fixes, somehow didn't get to 4.0 branch. > > > On 26 January 2017 at 21:44, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >> >> How is XRay tested? IIRC, Renato didn't see any test failures on ARM? >> >> Merging sounds reasonbaly, I'd just like to understand what's the risk >> for the branch. >> >> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > Hans, these changes reached trunk in https://reviews.llvm.org/rL292516 >> > and >> > https://reviews.llvm.org/rL292517 . Could you look? >> > >> > On 26 January 2017 at 03:29, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Sorry, I initially included LLVM-Commits rather than LLVM-Dev. Fixed. >> >> >> >> On 26 January 2017 at 03:26, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi Dean, Renato, >> >>> >> >>> AFAIK, unfortunately, these critical Arm32 XRay fixes are not yet in >> >>> 4.0: >> >>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D28624 , https://reviews.llvm.org/D28623 . >> >>> The >> >>> first repairs XRay instrumentation map emission. Without this map XRay >> >>> doesn't work at all: the runtime doesn't see anything to instrument. >> >>> The >> >>> second fixes the CPU cache incoherency problem. Without this patch, >> >>> XRay >> >>> will intermittently fail to patch or unpatch some sleds (depending on >> >>> whether their code is in CPU cache or not). >> >>> >> >>> Is there any chance we can get these patches to 4.0? This page >> >>> http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html#release-patch-rules says >> >>> that >> >>> "release manager, the official release testers or the code owners" may >> >>> approve cherry-picking to release branch from trunk. AFAIK, you are >> >>> code >> >>> owners for XRay and ARM. I don't know who are the release manager or >> >>> official release testers. >> >>> >> >>> Cheers, >> >>> Serge >> >> >> >> >> > > >