llvm dev - Feb 2017 - Build status expectations for experimental targets

> On Feb 3, 2017, at 12:45 PM, Dylan McKay via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> The builder isn’t marked as experimental so I think the expectation is that
people keep it green and contact the bot owner if they need help figuring out
why their change makes it red. That said, it sounds a bit odd to have a
non-experimental builder for an experimental backend.
> 
> I see. I had followed the generic How to add a builder
<http://llvm.org/docs/HowToAddABuilder.html> docs, which doesn’t mention
the concept of an experimental buildbot. I’ll send a patch to mention it.
> 
> If you want to do the same, then you’ll need to add an
InformativeMailNotifier to
http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/zorg/trunk/buildbot/osuosl/master/config/status.py
<http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/zorg/trunk/buildbot/osuosl/master/config/status.py>.
> 
> Nice! Exactly what I was looking for.
> 
> If we would believe the AVR backend is stable enough, such that users can
rely on it and such that other developers are unlikely to trigger bugs in the
AVR backend, the AVR backend should most likely be promoted to a stable backend.
> 
> In general, I’ve found that almost all of the time that the AVR build
breaks, it’s been something pretty small which also caused a bunch of other
targets to fail also, which I suppose is a good sign. On the topic, I plan on
following up on promoting the backend to stable once the current effort of
enabling AVR in Rust is complete and we’ve ironed out any bugs found in usage.
> 
> As a result of this, I would also expect buildbots of the AVR backend to
not send any emails to the general public, but to instead send emails to the
buildbot owner and maintainer of the AVR backend.
> 
> Agree with this
> 
> +1. The silent staging buildbot is what you want I believe
>
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/Week-of-Mon-20151012/024214.html
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/Week-of-Mon-20151012/024214.html>
> That sounds good. My plan is to make the buildbot a staging bot, and then
be the sole receiver of emails from it.
> 
> If I was in this position, I’d also configure the bot to build only the AVR
backend. That’s help make sure that an email does get send when a test fails in
the X86 backend.
> 
> I would love to do this, but there’s a bug in the backend which causes a
few of the Generic CodeGen tests to fail. To work around this, I leave X86 as
the default target for now. I’m definitely planning on updating this once I’ve
fixed the bug.
> 
> 
This usually happens when LLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE is not explicitely set and
you end up with your host machine as default while not building the x86 target.
If you set LLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE to some AVR ones the failure should go
away (otherwise complain and file bugs).

- Matthias

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170203/3332a7db/attachment.html>

> On Feb 3, 2017, at 5:14 PM, Matthias Braun <mbraun at apple.com>
wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Feb 3, 2017, at 12:45 PM, Dylan McKay via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> The builder isn’t marked as experimental so I think the expectation is
that people keep it green and contact the bot owner if they need help figuring
out why their change makes it red. That said, it sounds a bit odd to have a
non-experimental builder for an experimental backend.
>> 
>> I see. I had followed the generic How to add a builder
<http://llvm.org/docs/HowToAddABuilder.html> docs, which doesn’t mention
the concept of an experimental buildbot. I’ll send a patch to mention it.
>> 
>> If you want to do the same, then you’ll need to add an
InformativeMailNotifier to
http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/zorg/trunk/buildbot/osuosl/master/config/status.py
<http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/zorg/trunk/buildbot/osuosl/master/config/status.py>.
>> 
>> Nice! Exactly what I was looking for.
>> 
>> If we would believe the AVR backend is stable enough, such that users
can rely on it and such that other developers are unlikely to trigger bugs in
the AVR backend, the AVR backend should most likely be promoted to a stable
backend.
>> 
>> In general, I’ve found that almost all of the time that the AVR build
breaks, it’s been something pretty small which also caused a bunch of other
targets to fail also, which I suppose is a good sign. On the topic, I plan on
following up on promoting the backend to stable once the current effort of
enabling AVR in Rust is complete and we’ve ironed out any bugs found in usage.
>> 
>> As a result of this, I would also expect buildbots of the AVR backend
to not send any emails to the general public, but to instead send emails to the
buildbot owner and maintainer of the AVR backend.
>> 
>> Agree with this
>> 
>> +1. The silent staging buildbot is what you want I believe
>>
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/Week-of-Mon-20151012/024214.html
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/Week-of-Mon-20151012/024214.html>
>> That sounds good. My plan is to make the buildbot a staging bot, and
then be the sole receiver of emails from it.
>> 
>> If I was in this position, I’d also configure the bot to build only the
AVR backend. That’s help make sure that an email does get send when a test fails
in the X86 backend.
>> 
>> I would love to do this, but there’s a bug in the backend which causes
a few of the Generic CodeGen tests to fail. To work around this, I leave X86 as
the default target for now. I’m definitely planning on updating this once I’ve
fixed the bug.
>> 
>> 
> 
> This usually happens when LLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE is not explicitely set
and you end up with your host machine as default while not building the x86
target. If you set LLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE to some AVR ones the failure
should go away (otherwise complain and file bugs).
Actually I believe you have to set it to empty to disable “generic” tests.

— 
Mehdi


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170203/27aed982/attachment-0001.html>

> On Feb 3, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Feb 3, 2017, at 5:14 PM, Matthias Braun <mbraun at apple.com
<mailto:mbraun at apple.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 3, 2017, at 12:45 PM, Dylan McKay via llvm-dev <llvm-dev
at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> The builder isn’t marked as experimental so I think the expectation
is that people keep it green and contact the bot owner if they need help
figuring out why their change makes it red. That said, it sounds a bit odd to
have a non-experimental builder for an experimental backend.
>>> 
>>> I see. I had followed the generic How to add a builder
<http://llvm.org/docs/HowToAddABuilder.html> docs, which doesn’t mention
the concept of an experimental buildbot. I’ll send a patch to mention it.
>>> 
>>> If you want to do the same, then you’ll need to add an
InformativeMailNotifier to
http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/zorg/trunk/buildbot/osuosl/master/config/status.py
<http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/zorg/trunk/buildbot/osuosl/master/config/status.py>.
>>> 
>>> Nice! Exactly what I was looking for.
>>> 
>>> If we would believe the AVR backend is stable enough, such that
users can rely on it and such that other developers are unlikely to trigger bugs
in the AVR backend, the AVR backend should most likely be promoted to a stable
backend.
>>> 
>>> In general, I’ve found that almost all of the time that the AVR
build breaks, it’s been something pretty small which also caused a bunch of
other targets to fail also, which I suppose is a good sign. On the topic, I plan
on following up on promoting the backend to stable once the current effort of
enabling AVR in Rust is complete and we’ve ironed out any bugs found in usage.
>>> 
>>> As a result of this, I would also expect buildbots of the AVR
backend to not send any emails to the general public, but to instead send emails
to the buildbot owner and maintainer of the AVR backend.
>>> 
>>> Agree with this
>>> 
>>> +1. The silent staging buildbot is what you want I believe
>>>
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/Week-of-Mon-20151012/024214.html
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/Week-of-Mon-20151012/024214.html>
>>> That sounds good. My plan is to make the buildbot a staging bot,
and then be the sole receiver of emails from it.
>>> 
>>> If I was in this position, I’d also configure the bot to build only
the AVR backend. That’s help make sure that an email does get send when a test
fails in the X86 backend.
>>> 
>>> I would love to do this, but there’s a bug in the backend which
causes a few of the Generic CodeGen tests to fail. To work around this, I leave
X86 as the default target for now. I’m definitely planning on updating this once
I’ve fixed the bug.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> This usually happens when LLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE is not explicitely
set and you end up with your host machine as default while not building the x86
target. If you set LLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE to some AVR ones the failure
should go away (otherwise complain and file bugs).
> 
> Actually I believe you have to set it to empty to disable “generic” tests.
Confirmed:

$ cat llvm/test/CodeGen/Generic/lit.local.cfg 
if not config.target_triple:
    config.unsupported = True


— 
Mehdi


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170203/fa646b21/attachment.html>