similar to: [LLVMdev] LNT server is down

I don’t have access to that server. I have been using a cloud LNT instance for the performance runs on the green-dragon cluster. So far it has provided 100% uptime! http://llvm-lnt.herokuapp.com <http://llvm-lnt.herokuapp.com/> > On Nov 24, 2014, at 3:24 PM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > > On 24.11.2014 23:54, Galina Kistanova wrote: >> Hello

Hi Galina, It seems that our libcxx bots are now triggering builds for any changes to llvm: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/libcxx-libcxxabi-libunwind-aarch64-linux/builds/2434 Should I file a bug report for this? Thanks, Diana On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 at 11:36, Galina Kistanova via cfe-commits <cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > The staging master is

I think what she is referring to was that the build seemed to be triggered by a commit to a project that shouldn't trigger builds on a libcxx bot (i.e. the change was in llvm). I have a somewhat orthogonal but related question. In the past, commits to compiler-rt did not trigger builds on llvm/clang/sanitizer bots. Has this behaviour been rectified with the move to github? I am really sorry

Hello build bot owners! The staging master is ready. Please feel free to use it to make sure your bots would work well with the monorepo and github. The following builders could be configured to build monorepo: * clang-atom-d525-fedora-rel * clang-native-arm-lnt-perf * clang-cmake-armv7-lnt * clang-cmake-armv7-selfhost-neon * clang-cmake-armv7-quick * clang-cmake-armv7-global-isel *

Hello everyone, We are in the middle of porting the majority of zorg to GitHub/monorepo. The following build factories will be ported and if you use one of those for your bots, you are all covered: * ClangBuilder.getClangCMakeBuildFactory (31 bots) * ClangBuilder.getClangCMakeGCSBuildFactory (2 bots) * LibcxxAndAbiBuilder (23 bots) * SphinxDocsBuilder (7 bots) * UnifiedTreeBuilder (11

Disabling swap and having a single CPU in the shield group didn't change much, besides cpu-migrations and context-switches, which now are 0 obviously. That clustering remains the same. It is also stable to the number of runs (I have changed the test to run 20 times in the middle of that range on the right). http://lnt.llvm.org/db_default/v4/link/graph?highlight_run=426&plot.9=1.9.6

Hi Rafael, Thanks for mentioning this. It should be running as root, but I'll double check anyway. Thanks Galina On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Rafael Avila de Espindola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> writes: > > > Disabling swap and having a single CPU in the shield group didn't change > > much,

Thanks a lot for setting this up! By using the "mean as aggregation" option one can see the noise in the results better: http://lnt.llvm.org/db_default/v4/link/graph?switch_min_mean=yes&moving_window_size=10&plot.9=1.9.7&submit=Update There are a few benchmarknig tips in https://www.llvm.org/docs/Benchmarking.html. For example, from looking at

Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> writes: > Yep. They are still clustered. > >> Is there anything else running on the machine while the tests are run? > > Not much. The usual buildslave stuff - buildbot, ssh server, some light > network services, snmp client, but that's pretty much it. 20 hardware > threads are designated for this. > > The test

Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> writes: > Hello Rafael, > >> It seems the produced lld binary is not being statically linked. > > Hm. It should. But it seems couple config params are missing. Fixed. Thanks > for catching this! > >> Is lld-speed-test in a tmpfs? > > Correct. > All the benchmarking tips from

> The HT siblings are disabled, right? Correct. > It is probably a good idea to experiment with disabling swap and having > a single cpu in the shield group. Yep. This is what I'm in the middle of. So far I see that it seems the scheduler is keep running on shielded cores no matter what. Even if there is only 1 core in the shield. Thanks Galina On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:36

Hi, So, I owe you all an apology. I was totally unaware that the llvm.org server, running at UIUC, was still in operation and hosting an active LNT instance. I was under the assumption the LNT server ran elsewhere. As a result, the ability for the LNT bots to submit run information to the "old" LNT server is now gone. I am very sorry for this oversight. In speaking with Chris

Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> writes: > Disabling swap and having a single CPU in the shield group didn't change > much, besides cpu-migrations and context-switches, which now are 0 > obviously. > That clustering remains the same. It is also stable to the number of runs > (I have changed the test to run 20 times in the middle of that range on the > right).

>Hello everyone, > >I have added a new public LLD performance builder at >http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lld-perf-testsuite. >It builds LLVM and LLD by the latest releaed Clang and runs a set of >perfromance tests. > >The builder is reliable. Please pay attention on the failures. > >The performance statistics are here:

Hello George, Sorry, somehow hit a send button too soon. Please ignore the previous e-mail. The bot does 10 runs for each of the benchmarks (those dots in the logs are meaningful). We can increase the number of runs if proven that this would significantly increase the accuracy. I didn't see the increase in accuracy when have been staging the bot, which would justify the extra time and larger

Hi, I've had this problem on a compiler-rt change too. It was on the clang-cmake-mips builder earlier this week. ________________________________________ From: llvm-dev [llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] on behalf of Renato Golin via llvm-dev [llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org] Sent: 30 October 2015 08:34 To: Bill Seurer Cc: LLVM Dev Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Revisions that cause buildbot problems

The SVN mirror is back up and running. Please let me know if you would see any issues. Thanks for your patience. On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:26 PM, Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> wrote: > A quick update. > > The SVN mirror got corrupted by r297634. Svnsync does not like huge > commits. > I'm in the middle of restoring and synch-ing up the mirror. Too soon to

The problem remains after the buildmaster restart. Thanks Galina -----Original Message----- From: David Blaikie [mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 11:42 AM To: Galina Kistanova Cc: Duncan Sands; llvm-lab-wg at lists.minormatter.com; Galina Kistanova; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [llvm-lab-wg] FNT testers reporting success even though they failed On Tue,

On 19 February 2013 15:16, Arnold Schwaighofer <aschwaighofer at apple.com>wrote: > Do you have a base run with vectorization turned off? So we could see > where we are degrading things? > I wanted to, but after a few failed attempts, I couldn't pass the option to clang to disable vectorization. I don't want to make Galina reconfig the master every time, so I set up a

This issue is back: FNT bots are reporting success in spite of tests failing, and the "report" text is empty again. Did someone change something? Ciao, Duncan. On 12/12/12 07:53, Duncan Sands wrote: > On 11/12/12 23:16, Galina Kistanova wrote: >> The problem remains after the buildmaster restart. > > The FNT builders are now all failing again, and the "report"