similar to: [LLVMdev] Infinite Loops in Nightly Tests

On Jul 23, 2009, at 3:24 PM, David Greene wrote: > Today I'm seeing a lot of the nightly tests hit their execution time > limit. > Is this normal? I ran it this morning and it seemed to finish in a > reasonable amount of time. I updated and now it's taking forever. > Is it timing out during an SVN access or running of tests? If its SVN, then see my other mail.

On Feb 16, 2008, at 2:35 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: > On Feb 16, 2008, at 12:55 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: >>> Using built-in specs. >>> Target: i686-apple-darwin9 >>> Configured with: /tmp/llvmgcc42.r46865.roots/llvmgcc42.r46865~obj/ >>> src/configure --disable-checking --enable-werror --prefix=/ >>> Developer/ >>> usr/llvm-gcc-4.2

> > 4. Running Fortran, Ada, C/C++/ObjC tests as well with test results emailed > > to the llvm-testresults. > > Are these different or new tests? Why wouldn't they just be a part of the > llvm-test module? Then you don't have to do any modifications to the > scripts. Probably means the gcc testsuite. Ciao, Duncan.

On Wednesday 28 January 2009 15:59, Tanya Lattner wrote: > On Jan 28, 2009, at 12:18 PM, David Greene wrote: > > I have a buildbot operating to do validating builds of llvm up at > > > > http://obbligato.org:8080 > > > > My DSL has been stable enough for the past few months for me to > > feel comfortable hosting the buildbot there. > > We had a

If I click on a "View Details" link for a particular nightly test, my browser sits there waiting until I tell it to stop. I something wrong with the server? I thought I could do this ok yesterday. -Dave

On Feb 16, 2008, at 12:55 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: >> >> Using built-in specs. >> Target: i686-apple-darwin9 >> Configured with: /tmp/llvmgcc42.r46865.roots/llvmgcc42.r46865~obj/ >> src/configure --disable-checking --enable-werror --prefix=/Developer/ >> usr/llvm-gcc-4.2 --mandir=/Developer/usr/llvm-gcc-4.2/share/man -- >>

> > Using built-in specs. > Target: i686-apple-darwin9 > Configured with: /tmp/llvmgcc42.r46865.roots/llvmgcc42.r46865~obj/ > src/configure --disable-checking --enable-werror --prefix=/Developer/ > usr/llvm-gcc-4.2 --mandir=/Developer/usr/llvm-gcc-4.2/share/man -- > enable-languages=c,objc,c++,obj-c++ --program-prefix=llvm- --program- >

I had the same problem, actually. Is the HTML file just too heavy? It makes it hard to compare results from your workstation against the buildbots. Reid On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 3:22 PM, David Greene<dag at cray.com> wrote: > If I click on a "View Details" link for a particular nightly test, my browser > sits there waiting until I tell it to stop.  I something wrong with

hi all, After having some discussions in the IRC, I am trying here to come up with a proposal for GSoC 2008 for improving the llvm nightly tester[1].Following are the ideas and suggestions that came up in the discussion, if you have any comment or any other suggestion please add them to the list. I have some doubts in some places. 1. Improvements to the perl script which manage actual testing

>>> 4. Running Fortran, Ada, C/C++/ObjC tests as well with test results emailed >>> to the llvm-testresults. >> >> Are these different or new tests? Why wouldn't they just be a part of the >> llvm-test module? Then you don't have to do any modifications to the >> scripts. > > Probably means the gcc testsuite. Well then this should be

We are experiencing serious load/memory issues on llvm.org and unfortunately, there is not anything we can do about it. This means that because the nightlytest page needs to access a mysql database, it will be very very slow. Bugzilla will be slow too. We have a machine being ordered, but it will take time to arrive and time to setup. Until then, I'm asking people to please try to be

On Jan 28, 2009, at 3:46 PM, David Greene wrote: > On Wednesday 28 January 2009 15:59, Tanya Lattner wrote: >> On Jan 28, 2009, at 12:18 PM, David Greene wrote: >>> I have a buildbot operating to do validating builds of llvm up at >>> >>> http://obbligato.org:8080 >>> >>> My DSL has been stable enough for the past few months for me to

On Thursday 23 July 2009 17:43, Tanya Lattner wrote: > We are experiencing serious load/memory issues on llvm.org and > unfortunately, there is not anything we can do about it. This means > that because the nightlytest page needs to access a mysql database, it > will be very very slow. Bugzilla will be slow too. Has there been a spike in traffic recently? Or maybe I just got lucky

If you create a slave name and password for me, i'm happy to put one of the ubuntu 8.04 8 core machines i have running it. They are x86_64-linux (you would need to add -j8, which can be done through properties easily) On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:46 AM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > On Wednesday 28 January 2009 15:59, Tanya Lattner wrote: >> On Jan 28, 2009, at 12:18

Hi Bob, are these performance regressions real? They look pretty serious. Ciao, Duncan. On 10/12/11 09:40, llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: > > bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386 nightly tester results > > URL http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/simple/nts/332/ > Nickname bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386:4 > Name curlew.apple.com > > Run ID Order Start Time End Time >

Yes, they are real. I re-ran the two tests with the biggest execution time regressions, and the results were completely reproducible. On Oct 12, 2011, at 1:24 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Bob, are these performance regressions real? They look pretty serious. > > Ciao, Duncan. > > On 10/12/11 09:40, llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: >> >>

My main complaints about the nightly tester are: Loading the web pages is waaay tooo sllooooow The information provided is not terribly useful for tracking down bugs. What bug fixers need is environment+command line options adequate to reproduce the problem. Access to the run logs would be a good start. On Apr 4, 2008, at 9:22 PM, Rajika Kumarasiri wrote: > hi all, > After having

> Tanya M. Lattner wrote: > >> How large of a change have you made? With 3 days before the branch >> creation, I strongly advise people not to be checking in major changes. > > Depends how you look at it. Structurally, it separates two files into > four and moves some functionality from one class to a new class, so in a > sense that's a big change.

On 4/19/06, Rogelio Serrano <rogelio.serrano at gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/16/06, Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote: > > > > I've put the pre-release tar balls here: > > http://llvm.org/prereleases/1.7/ > > > > The build failed on i686-pc-linux-gnu. > > llvm[2]: Flexing FileLexer.l > llvm[2]: Compiling FileLexer.cpp for Release build

Hi Bob, >> A big compile time regression. Any ideas? >> >> Ciao, Duncan. > > False alarm. For some reason that I have not yet been able to figure out, these tests run significantly more slowly when I run them during the daytime, which I did for that run. I checked a few of the worst regressions reported here and they all recovered in subsequent runs. here is a crazy