similar to: Fwd: buildbot failure in LLVM on sanitizer-ppc64-linux1

On 10/29/2015 07:40 AM, Bill Seurer wrote: > On 10/28/15 23:47, Philip Reames via llvm-dev wrote: > > This long running bot failed on a unused variable warning. Given that > > several other bots cover the warnings, any chance we could get this one > > configured to not fail the build on warnings? Doing so would make it > > more likely to actually get to the

I'm trying to understand why the buildbot sanitizer-ppc64-linux1 fails due to my latest patch. It was in llvm::GlobalValue while the reported failure is: strcspn-2.c.tmp: /home/buildbots/sanitizerslave1/sanitizer-ppc64-1/build/llvm/projects/compiler-rt/test/asan/TestCases/strcspn-2.c:17: int main(int, char **): Assertion `r == sizeof(s1) - 1' failed. where strcspn-2.c (below) tests the

Hi, My New Year's resolution is to complain (constructively) whenever I get a spurious build failure email from a buildbot. For new or infrequent contributors especially, they can be extremely confusing and unnecessarily alarming. This one below is the first build ever attempted by the builder, so how on earth can it have come up with a meaningful blame list? And in any case, surely we

Hi All, I'm trying to reproduce a failure on llvm-ppc64-linux1 (http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/llvm-ppc64-linux1/builds/5382) and llvm-ppc64-linux2 builders caused by one of my patches yesterday. Some of the CodeGen/Hexagon tests failed to compile with stack dump problem. I tried to configure and build LLVM for PowerPC on my machine locally but don't see the failures. I had to remove

Hi, I just realised that the PPC64 bulddbot is failing because of a rather stupid issue: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/llvm-ppc64-linux1 Just removing the additional assembly file would make it green again. ;) cheers, --renato

Hi all, I have been experiencing the failure of the address sanitizer regression tests for a PPC64 target (Power7 machine). My understanding is that most of the failures are related with the fact the stack is not being dumped. I tried to understand what might be wrong and started by looking into the null_deref.cc test as it hangs during the test run. I observe that after the detection of the

Hi, Currently the first stage ("run sanitizer tests in gcc build") of the sanitizer-ppc64-linux1 buildbot is only failing because of: + cd clang_build + make -j16 check-lsan make: *** No rule to make target `check-lsan'. Stop. + echo @@@STEP_FAILURE@@@ @@@STEP_FAILURE@@@ + cd clang_build + make -j16 check-msan make: *** No rule to make target `check-msan'. Stop. + echo

Note that I've set the SA_NODEFER flag for the SEGV handler in the ASan runtime only a couple of days ago. Not sure that could've affected this test though; without that flag the second SEGV would've simply crashed the program. But you can try removing the flag from compiler-rt/trunk/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_posix_libcdep.cc and see if that makes any difference. HTH, Alex On

How about tweaking the compiler-rt cmakefiles so that if lsan is not supported, the target check-lsan still exists but does nothing? I've attached a patch that does this. (I don't know much about cmake so there might be a better way of doing it.) Alternatively, can I change the zorg build script so that "run sanitizer tests in gcc build" doesn't try to run check-lsan etc

I updated one of my powerpc64le llvm test systems to Fedora 25 and I started getting a whole bunch of sanitizer test case failures. I tried testing some earlier revisions on the new OS that had worked fine under the old but they generate the same errors now so it isn't any changes in llvm. There are two different errors: FATAL: ThreadSanitizer: unsupported VMA range FATAL: Found 47 -

On 9/13/17 10:31 AM, Peter Bergner via llvm-dev wrote: > On 9/12/17 8:15 PM, Bill Seurer via llvm-dev wrote: >> I updated one of my powerpc64le llvm test systems to Fedora 25 and I >> started getting a whole bunch of sanitizer test case failures.  I tried >> testing some earlier revisions on the new OS that had worked fine under >> the old but they generate the same

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Samuel F Antao <sfantao at us.ibm.com> wrote: > Alexey, Alexander, > > Thanks for the suggestions. I tried removing the flag SA_NODEFER but it > didn't do any good... I have been digging into the problem with the > null_deref test today but I was unable to clearly identify the problem. I > suspect that it was either a bug with the

This buildbot appears to have been failing for several weeks now ( http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64-elf-linux2/builds/19490 ). Does anyone know/own/care about it? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <llvm.buildmaster at lab.llvm.org> Date: Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 11:17 PM Subject: buildbot failure in LLVM on clang-ppc64-elf-linux2 To: Aaron Ballman <aaron at

On Tue, 2015-09-29 at 14:29 -0500, Hal Finkel wrote: > [+Bill and Bill] > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David Blaikie via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > > To: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 12:39:02 PM > > Subject: [llvm-dev] Fwd: buildbot failure in LLVM on

On Mon, 2014-09-08 at 22:00 -0400, Samuel F Antao wrote: > Alexey, Alexander, > > Thanks for the suggestions. I tried removing the flag SA_NODEFER but > it didn't do any good... I have been digging into the problem with the > null_deref test today but I was unable to clearly identify the > problem. I suspect that it was either a bug with the calling > convention/unwinding

Why is there a public GN buildbot that sends emails and IRC notifications? That isn't what was agreed upon. Either un-GM it, or silence it. Roman. On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 1:05 AM <llvm.buildmaster at lab.llvm.org> wrote: > > The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder sanitizer-x86_64-linux-gn while building llvm. > Full details are available at: >

The test case that you added in this revision fails on several of the power buildbots (for example, http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64-elf-linux2/builds/20127) and also when I build it locally: FAIL: Clang :: CodeGenCXX/main-norecurse.cpp (2951 of 27722) ******************** TEST 'Clang :: CodeGenCXX/main-norecurse.cpp' FAILED ******************** Script: --

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

I've investigated several failures that my buildbots detected but when I figured out which revisions caused the failures they weren't on any blame lists. Thus the developer has no clue they broke anything until I contact them. It appears this happens when (for instance) one of the test cases in projects/test-suite is updated and causes a failure. Such a revision also won't kick

> On 2015-Nov-05, at 08:31, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 11:26 AM, James Molloy <james at jamesmolloy.co.uk> wrote: >> Ah I see. >> >> I can't think of a way that would help users in any particular way offhand. >> I hadn't considered exposing it to clang users - do you think there is merit