search for: kuhnel

Hi Christian, I’m sorry, but this is still on my todo list. I’ve been a bit DoS’d lately, but I do hope to come back to this soon. -Chris > On Feb 21, 2020, at 4:24 AM, Christian Kühnel <kuhnel at google.com> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > Did you reach any decision on how to move forward? > I would be happy if we get this (or something similar) started... > > > Best, > Christian > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 7:58 AM Chris Lattner via llvm-dev <l...

Hi Galina, How can I set a builder to "batch mode"? I could not find any documentation or examples for that... Best, Christian On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 9:33 AM Christian Kühnel <kuhnel at google.com> wrote: > Hi folks, > > happy to set it to batch mode, if someone tells me where to configure it :) > > Otherwise we could also upgrade the machine from 16 to 32 cores, if you > would like to get more build results. Or do both... > > > Best, > Christi...

Hi folks, Bad news: the permerge testing service is down after a Jenkins update. We're working on it but it's more difficult to resolve this than expected. I disabled the builds right now. I'll keep you posted once it's back online. Sorry for the downtime... Best, Christian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 11:24 PM David Greene <greened at obbligato.org> wrote: > Christian Kühnel via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > > >>> In Github pull requests there is always a git commit that you can just > >>> feed to the build server. And you can be sure of what really gets > merged. > >>> You review, build and test

Please forgive the incorrect threading on this reply to Tom Stellard's RFC. > I would like to start using GitHub Actions[1] for CI testing on the release/* > branches. As far as I know we don't have any buildbots listening to the > release branches, and I think GitHub Actions are a good way for us to > quickly bring-up some CI jobs there. Personally, I feel that Tom's

...is that LLVM could prove to be too big and require too > many resources for github's infrastructure. How many patches go into LLVM a > day, and how many build and test jobs does GitHub allow users to run > concurrently before being throttled? > > You may have seen that Christian Kuhnel has been working on a pre-commit > testing bot that integrates with Phab: > https://reviews.llvm.org/p/merge_guards_bot/ > https://github.com/google/llvm-premerge-checks/blob/master/docs/user_doc.md > I hope that ends up being the way forward and suits Tom's original release > te...

...oncern is that LLVM could prove to be too big and require too many resources for github's infrastructure. How many patches go into LLVM a day, and how many build and test jobs does GitHub allow users to run concurrently before being throttled? > > You may have seen that Christian Kuhnel has been working on a pre-commit testing bot that integrates with Phab: > https://reviews.llvm.org/p/merge_guards_bot/ > https://github.com/google/llvm-premerge-checks/blob/master/docs/user_doc.md > I hope that ends up being the way forward and suits Tom's orig...

Thanks for the reply. Typing in my username and clicking "Forgot password?" got me a link I could use to log in. It'd still be good if federated login worked again. Is there an upstream issue for this? On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 5:09 PM Alex Brachet-Mialot < alexbrachetmialot at gmail.com> wrote: > Yes this was broken for me too, there was another post on here about this

Hi all, Thank you for everyone that participated in the first round of the discussion <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-January/138267.html>. I’ve incorporated feedback into the draft of the proposal, and I’d appreciate it if you could take another look and share your thoughts. One piece of feedback is that GitHub gists aren’t great for detailed feedback and iteration, so I

Hi everyone, In the reviewing system, after a patch is approved, what should be the following step? I assume I'll have to make sure the patch hasn't broken anything, before pushing it, so I'll wan't to run a full build+tests, probably in a remote sterile environment (like a jenkins server). Do we have an integration system like this? Or should I just trust the build+tests on my

+1 for batching. In practice it's probably more important that things get run for every MLIR checkin, and not necessarily for every LLVM checkin. Steve On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 9:26 AM Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Indeed there is quite a backlog here right now: > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/mlir-windows and here >

Hi Everyone, Numerous people have been bringing up challenges with consensus driven decision making in the LLVM community. After considering this and seeing the frustrations it is causing many people, I think we should make a formal process change to help improve decision making going forward. Here is the outline of the draft proposal