llvm dev - Oct 2020 - [Lldb-commits] Upcoming upgrade of LLVM buildbot

Switched all but PPC, I don't have access to them. But they run the same
script as sanitizer-x86_64-linux.
http://lab.llvm.org:8014/#/waterfall?tags=sanitizer

On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 at 19:19, Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com>
wrote:
> We have a better version of AnnotatedCommand on the staging. It should be
> a functional equivalent of the old one.
> We need to stress test it well before moving to the production build bot.
>
> For that we need all sanitizer + other bots which use the AnnotatedCommand
> directly or indirectly moved temporarily to the staging.
>
> Please let me know when that could be arranged.
>
> Thanks
>
> Galina
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 11:39 AM Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com>
wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 4:32 PM Galina Kistanova via lldb-commits <
>> lldb-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> They are online now -
>>> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/#/waterfall?tags=sanitizer
>>>
>>> AnnotatedCommand has severe design conflict with the new buildbot.
>>> We have changed it to be safe and still do something useful, but it
will
>>> need more love and care.
>>>
>>> Please let me know if you have some spare time to work on porting
>>> AnnotatedCommand.
>>>
>>
>> That's unfortunate, it would've been good to know that earlier.
I and
>> another team member have spent a fair amount of time porting things to
use
>> more AnnotatedCommand steps, because it gives us the flexibility to
test
>> steps locally and make changes to the steps without restarting the
buildbot
>> master. IMO that is the Right Way to define steps: a script that you
can
>> run locally on a machine that satisfies the OS and dep requirements of
the
>> script.
>>
>> I am restarting the two bots that I am responsible for, and may need
some
>> help debugging further issues soon. I'll let you know.
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20201012/cc5036b5/attachment-0001.html>

Looks like staging AnnotatedCommand fixed step statuses, so we can see
which one is green.
Please let me know when to switch bots back from the staging.
Thank you!

On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 at 21:38, Vitaly Buka <vitalybuka at google.com>
wrote:
> Switched all but PPC, I don't have access to them. But they run the
same
> script as sanitizer-x86_64-linux.
> http://lab.llvm.org:8014/#/waterfall?tags=sanitizer
>
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 at 19:19, Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at
gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> We have a better version of AnnotatedCommand on the staging. It should
be
>> a functional equivalent of the old one.
>> We need to stress test it well before moving to the production build
bot.
>>
>> For that we need all sanitizer + other bots which use the
>> AnnotatedCommand directly or indirectly moved temporarily to the
staging.
>>
>> Please let me know when that could be arranged.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Galina
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 11:39 AM Reid Kleckner <rnk at
google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 4:32 PM Galina Kistanova via lldb-commits
<
>>> lldb-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> They are online now -
>>>> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/#/waterfall?tags=sanitizer
>>>>
>>>> AnnotatedCommand has severe design conflict with the new
buildbot.
>>>> We have changed it to be safe and still do something useful,
but it
>>>> will need more love and care.
>>>>
>>>> Please let me know if you have some spare time to work on
porting
>>>> AnnotatedCommand.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's unfortunate, it would've been good to know that
earlier. I and
>>> another team member have spent a fair amount of time porting things
to use
>>> more AnnotatedCommand steps, because it gives us the flexibility to
test
>>> steps locally and make changes to the steps without restarting the
buildbot
>>> master. IMO that is the Right Way to define steps: a script that
you can
>>> run locally on a machine that satisfies the OS and dep requirements
of the
>>> script.
>>>
>>> I am restarting the two bots that I am responsible for, and may
need
>>> some help debugging further issues soon. I'll let you know.
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20201012/d3232b73/attachment.html>

Thanks, Vitaly!

Let's have them there for at least 24 hours, shall we?

Could you move sanitizer-buildbot1, sanitizer-buildbot3,
sanitizer-buildbot7 as well, please?

AnnotatedCommand on the staging has been tested functionally and is good.
My only concern at this point is how it would handle a heavy load, so the
more bots we will have on the staging the better.

If somebody else could move their AnnotatedCommand bots to the staging
area, that would be much appreciated.

Thanks

Galina

On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 9:45 PM Vitaly Buka <vitalybuka at google.com>
wrote:
> Looks like staging AnnotatedCommand fixed step statuses, so we can see
> which one is green.
> Please let me know when to switch bots back from the staging.
> Thank you!
>
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 at 21:38, Vitaly Buka <vitalybuka at google.com>
wrote:
>
>> Switched all but PPC, I don't have access to them. But they run the
same
>> script as sanitizer-x86_64-linux.
>> http://lab.llvm.org:8014/#/waterfall?tags=sanitizer
>>
>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 at 19:19, Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at
gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We have a better version of AnnotatedCommand on the staging. It
should
>>> be a functional equivalent of the old one.
>>> We need to stress test it well before moving to the production
build bot.
>>>
>>> For that we need all sanitizer + other bots which use the
>>> AnnotatedCommand directly or indirectly moved temporarily to the
staging.
>>>
>>> Please let me know when that could be arranged.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Galina
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 11:39 AM Reid Kleckner <rnk at
google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 4:32 PM Galina Kistanova via
lldb-commits <
>>>> lldb-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> They are online now -
>>>>> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/#/waterfall?tags=sanitizer
>>>>>
>>>>> AnnotatedCommand has severe design conflict with the new
buildbot.
>>>>> We have changed it to be safe and still do something
useful, but it
>>>>> will need more love and care.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please let me know if you have some spare time to work on
porting
>>>>> AnnotatedCommand.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's unfortunate, it would've been good to know that
earlier. I and
>>>> another team member have spent a fair amount of time porting
things to use
>>>> more AnnotatedCommand steps, because it gives us the
flexibility to test
>>>> steps locally and make changes to the steps without restarting
the buildbot
>>>> master. IMO that is the Right Way to define steps: a script
that you can
>>>> run locally on a machine that satisfies the OS and dep
requirements of the
>>>> script.
>>>>
>>>> I am restarting the two bots that I am responsible for, and may
need
>>>> some help debugging further issues soon. I'll let you know.
>>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20201012/6ceb4e4b/attachment.html>