llvm dev - Sep 2020 - Can we remove llvmbb from IRC?

Hi,

llvmbb's job is to inform people of build breaks. However, it seems to
trigger for a big list of bots, and at least one of them seems to always be
broken, and the broken bots tend to have cycle times of several hours. So
if you're on IRC and you commit something, you get pinged by llvmbb for
hours afterwards.

Does anyone think llvmbb is useful?

The best thing about llvmbb I've heard it's easy to just "/ignore
llvmbb",
but if that's what everybody does then why not not have it in the first
place?

Nico
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200901/055a648b/attachment.html>

Check out the #llvm-build channel.  In themain IRC channel, I block llvmbb, then
just also listen in for my name in #llvm-build.  The bot has a different name
there, so it is still possible to block in #llvm.

From: cfe-dev <cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Nico Weber
via cfe-dev
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 12:08 PM
To: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; cfe-dev <cfe-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
Subject: [cfe-dev] Can we remove llvmbb from IRC?

Hi,

llvmbb's job is to inform people of build breaks. However, it seems to
trigger for a big list of bots, and at least one of them seems to always be
broken, and the broken bots tend to have cycle times of several hours. So if
you're on IRC and you commit something, you get pinged by llvmbb for hours
afterwards.

Does anyone think llvmbb is useful?

The best thing about llvmbb I've heard it's easy to just "/ignore
llvmbb", but if that's what everybody does then why not not have it in
the first place?

Nico
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200901/95f1f658/attachment.html>

+cfe-dev again 😊

From: Keane, Erich
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 12:10 PM
To: Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
Subject: RE: [cfe-dev] Can we remove llvmbb from IRC?

Check out the #llvm-build channel.  In themain IRC channel, I block llvmbb, then
just also listen in for my name in #llvm-build.  The bot has a different name
there, so it is still possible to block in #llvm.

From: cfe-dev <cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org<mailto:cfe-dev-bounces at
lists.llvm.org>> On Behalf Of Nico Weber via cfe-dev
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 12:08 PM
To: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>>; cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:cfe-dev
at lists.llvm.org>>
Subject: [cfe-dev] Can we remove llvmbb from IRC?

Hi,

llvmbb's job is to inform people of build breaks. However, it seems to
trigger for a big list of bots, and at least one of them seems to always be
broken, and the broken bots tend to have cycle times of several hours. So if
you're on IRC and you commit something, you get pinged by llvmbb for hours
afterwards.

Does anyone think llvmbb is useful?

The best thing about llvmbb I've heard it's easy to just "/ignore
llvmbb", but if that's what everybody does then why not not have it in
the first place?

Nico
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200901/c15353b9/attachment.html>

Hi Nico,

On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 03:07:37PM -0400, Nico Weber via cfe-dev
wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> llvmbb's job is to inform people of build breaks. However, it seems to
trigger
> for a big list of bots, and at least one of them seems to always be broken,
and
> the broken bots tend to have cycle times of several hours. So if you're
on IRC
> and you commit something, you get pinged by llvmbb for hours afterwards.
> 
> Does anyone think llvmbb is useful?
> 
> The best thing about llvmbb I've heard it's easy to just
"/ignore llvmbb", but
> if that's what everybody does then why not not have it in the first
place?
I find it useful to /ignore llvmbb it *and* /join #llvm-build

Hi,
> On Sep 1, 2020, at 20:10, Serge Guelton via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Nico,
> 
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 03:07:37PM -0400, Nico Weber via cfe-dev wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> llvmbb's job is to inform people of build breaks. However, it
seems to trigger
>> for a big list of bots, and at least one of them seems to always be
broken, and
>> the broken bots tend to have cycle times of several hours. So if
you're on IRC
>> and you commit something, you get pinged by llvmbb for hours
afterwards.
>> 
>> Does anyone think llvmbb is useful?
>> 
>> The best thing about llvmbb I've heard it's easy to just
"/ignore llvmbb", but
>> if that's what everybody does then why not not have it in the first
place?
> 
> I find it useful to /ignore llvmbb it *and* /join #llvm-build

That’s great, I wasn’t aware of the #llvm-build channel. 

If we already have a dedicated #llvm-build channel, IMO it would make sense to
remove llvmbb from the main channel, to cut down on the noise. It does not seem
to add much because the false-positive rate is high and people who are
interested can use #llvm-build.

Cheers,
Florian

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 12:07 PM Nico Weber via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> llvmbb's job is to inform people of build breaks. However, it seems to
> trigger for a big list of bots, and at least one of them seems to always be
> broken,
>
If a bot is always broken it shouldn't be sending email/notifications -
generally they are configured only to send email on green>red and
red>green
transitions, so if it's already broken you shouldn't be blamed for it.
If
you are seeing bot spam or emails from a bot that's already red, please
email llvm-dev and the bot maintainer and ask the bot to be reconfigured or
disabled.

If a bot is regularly flakey (& thus sending email/notifications that are
false-positives/that no one can act on) please also send email asking for
the bot to be reconfigured or disabled. (or, if you want to be a bit more
punchy - send a patch to the zorg repository to have the bot disabled &
explain why you're proposing that)

> and the broken bots tend to have cycle times of several hours.
>
Long cycle times are a real problem - that might be best left to another
discussion about buildbot maintenance - I would be for a policy that says
bot windows shouldn't be longer than, say, an hour or maybe less. (so, eg:
if you have a bot that's just going to take 5 hours to run - then you need
5 machines that each pickup work every hour, so the blame lists are
smaller) this doesn't solve the problem of being notified 5 hours later
about a breakage that was caused by someone else who committed a few
minutes before or after you. Solving that problem will require a much
greater investment in infrastructure to chain buildbots, possibly use built
artefacts from one buildbot to another, etc.

> So if you're on IRC and you commit something, you get pinged by llvmbb
for
> hours afterwards.
>
> Does anyone think llvmbb is useful?
>
I sometimes find it useful, but happy to move to llvm-build to get those
notifications. Other folks might not know to do that, though.

> The best thing about llvmbb I've heard it's easy to just
"/ignore llvmbb",
> but if that's what everybody does then why not not have it in the first
> place?
>
> Nico
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200901/9a7bf16f/attachment.html>

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 3:32 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 12:07 PM Nico Weber via cfe-dev <
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> llvmbb's job is to inform people of build breaks. However, it seems
to
>> trigger for a big list of bots, and at least one of them seems to
always be
>> broken,
>>
>
> If a bot is always broken it shouldn't be sending email/notifications -
> generally they are configured only to send email on green>red and
red>green
> transitions, so if it's already broken you shouldn't be blamed for
it. If
> you are seeing bot spam or emails from a bot that's already red, please
> email llvm-dev and the bot maintainer and ask the bot to be reconfigured or
> disabled.
>
> If a bot is regularly flakey (& thus sending email/notifications that
are
> false-positives/that no one can act on) please also send email asking for
> the bot to be reconfigured or disabled. (or, if you want to be a bit more
> punchy - send a patch to the zorg repository to have the bot disabled &
> explain why you're proposing that)
>
I agree with this in the abstract, but I get pinged completely reliably at
least twice after every single of my commits. This isn't something that
sometimes happens, it's something that always happens.

>
>
>> and the broken bots tend to have cycle times of several hours.
>>
>
> Long cycle times are a real problem - that might be best left to another
> discussion about buildbot maintenance - I would be for a policy that says
> bot windows shouldn't be longer than, say, an hour or maybe less. (so,
eg:
> if you have a bot that's just going to take 5 hours to run - then you
need
> 5 machines that each pickup work every hour, so the blame lists are
> smaller) this doesn't solve the problem of being notified 5 hours later
> about a breakage that was caused by someone else who committed a few
> minutes before or after you. Solving that problem will require a much
> greater investment in infrastructure to chain buildbots, possibly use built
> artefacts from one buildbot to another, etc.
>
>
>> So if you're on IRC and you commit something, you get pinged by
llvmbb
>> for hours afterwards.
>>
>> Does anyone think llvmbb is useful?
>>
>
> I sometimes find it useful, but happy to move to llvm-build to get those
> notifications. Other folks might not know to do that, though.
>
>
>> The best thing about llvmbb I've heard it's easy to just
"/ignore
>> llvmbb", but if that's what everybody does then why not not
have it in the
>> first place?
>>
>> Nico
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200901/794ae504/attachment.html>

I'm not on IRC anymore, so my opinion matters less, but I think it's
time
to shut it down. It is a relic from a different time when there were fewer
bots, fewer contributors, and more IRC users. These days it generates too
many notifications and the audience isn't as well targeted.

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 12:08 PM Nico Weber via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> llvmbb's job is to inform people of build breaks. However, it seems to
> trigger for a big list of bots, and at least one of them seems to always be
> broken, and the broken bots tend to have cycle times of several hours. So
> if you're on IRC and you commit something, you get pinged by llvmbb for
> hours afterwards.
>
> Does anyone think llvmbb is useful?
>
> The best thing about llvmbb I've heard it's easy to just
"/ignore llvmbb",
> but if that's what everybody does then why not not have it in the first
> place?
>
> Nico
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200903/f806326f/attachment.html>

Fair enough - it is very noisy.

I'm surprised these aren't all producing corresponding emails, though
(at
least those only go to the people on the blame list - but that seemed to be
the case Nico was citing - though the general "I'm not even to blame
but
this is adding a lot of noise to the channel/making it hard to have
conversations" is a broad/broader problem). And still seems important to
improve the signal/noise ratio.

Sent https://reviews.llvm.org/D87100 to do that. & also looking into the
config about IRC V email notification configuration. Hopefully those
configurations can be unified. I don't think it's any more appropriate
to
send IRC notifications than email notifications. (I guess now that the IRC
notifications will be fairly opt-in, maybe - but I still would rather there
be less noise to make the signal stand out, so if a bot isn't producing
accurate enough info to send mail, then maybe not IRC either)

On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:47 AM Reid Kleckner via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> I'm not on IRC anymore, so my opinion matters less, but I think
it's time
> to shut it down. It is a relic from a different time when there were fewer
> bots, fewer contributors, and more IRC users. These days it generates too
> many notifications and the audience isn't as well targeted.
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 12:08 PM Nico Weber via cfe-dev <
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> llvmbb's job is to inform people of build breaks. However, it seems
to
>> trigger for a big list of bots, and at least one of them seems to
always be
>> broken, and the broken bots tend to have cycle times of several hours.
So
>> if you're on IRC and you commit something, you get pinged by llvmbb
for
>> hours afterwards.
>>
>> Does anyone think llvmbb is useful?
>>
>> The best thing about llvmbb I've heard it's easy to just
"/ignore
>> llvmbb", but if that's what everybody does then why not not
have it in the
>> first place?
>>
>> Nico
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200903/5ee5d71a/attachment.html>