similar to: clang-ppc64be-linux-lnt flakiness

I threw all the sanitizers I had access to on this test and didn't find anything. The merging uses threads so I can't rule out nondeterminism. It's strange that it only happens on ppc64le and only on stage 2, so an actual miscompile wouldn't surprise me either. On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > Also, `Clang Tools ::

This just failed again: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64le-linux-multistage/builds/1579 Bill, could you take a look at this? This is like the 3rd time I've been incorrectly pinged by this buildbot due to this issue. -- Sean Silva On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for taking a look. The flaky ASan test failure in the

Thanks for taking a look. The flaky ASan test failure in the OP was stage1 so it sounds like there may be multiple problems :( -- Sean Silva On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com> wrote: > I threw all the sanitizers I had access to on this test and didn't > find anything. The merging uses threads so I can't rule out > nondeterminism.

I looked at this a bit a while back when you first asked but I didn't see anything obviously wrong. Benjamin, at least one of the referenced failures was on BE powerpc64. I don't remember if that one (http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux-lnt/builds/4883) failed on stage 1 or 2 and the results pages are no longer available. BTW, I tried testing the same revision many

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the last week of 6/05/2016 - 6/11/2016. Thanks Galina buildername | was_red -----------------------------------------------------------+----------- sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap | 134:12:25 perf-x86_64-penryn-O3-polly-parallel-fast | 46:29:26

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the week of 7/10/2016 - 7/16/2016. Please see the same data in attached csv files: The longest time each builder was red during the week; "Status change ratio" by active builder (percent of builds that changed the builder status from greed to red or from red to green); Count of commits by project; Number of completed builds, failed

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the last week of 9/25/2016 - 10/1/2016. Please see the same data in attached csv files: The longest time each builder was red during the last week; "Status change ratio" by active builder (percent of builds that changed the builder status from greed to red or from red to green); Count of commits by project; Number of completed

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 *

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

http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux-multistage/builds/60 probably didn't use OS X? On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 11:20 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Can we XFAIL it only on OSX/Darwin & file a bug? It sounds like the issue > may be restricted to that platform & there's incomplete (possibly ongoing) > investigation? That way we

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

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 5:24 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:23 AM, Nico Weber <thakis at google.com> wrote: >> >> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux-multistage/builds/60 >> probably didn't use OS X? > > > Fair point - Kostya/Dmitry, any ideas here? > >> >> >>

On 01/22/2016 09:47 PM, Nico Weber via llvm-dev wrote: > Here's another one: > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux-multistage/builds/60 I just got another error. Could we possibly disable this test until this issue has been resolved? Best, Tobias

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Kuba Brecka <jbrecka at apple.com> wrote: >> Hm, I tried to reproduce this as well, but unsuccessfully. From the crash >> report: EXC_I386_GPFLT means we’re dereferencing a non-canonical pointer, >> in this case “0x00486000000025df”. This happens at

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

Seems there were a couple of correlated failures that appear to be flakes on this buildbot recently: green: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64le-linux-multistage/builds/13974 red: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64le-linux-multistage/builds/13975 (target-override.c during stage 1, seems to be missing the directory/symlink it just created) red:

https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/lit.html already lists %T as "parent directory of %t (not unique, deprecated, do not use)". See also https://reviews.llvm.org/D35396 On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 3:37 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, I think I'd be up for considering deprecation of %T due to the risk > of race conditions/conflicts between tests. %t

Well, I am at my wit's end. I have copied over the script and directories for this test case and run it a few million times. First I was running one at a time, then I switched to kicking off 1000 at a time. All the while, the bots continued to run on the same machine. The script never failed even once. I am not sure if this has something to do with Python as part of llvm-lit or what is going

Sure. I didn't use lit or ninja. I simply copied the script produced by lit (/home/buildbots/ppc64le-clang-multistage-test/clang-ppc64le-multistage/stage1/tools/clang/test/Driver/Output/target-override.c.script) into a temporary directory (along with a deep copy of the build directory). I modified the paths in the script to point to the temporary directory. Then I ran the script in a loop. For

I think that was maybe the discussion on https://reviews.llvm.org/D78245 On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 6:22 PM Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: > I have a vague memory that libcxx wanted it for something, and claimed it > would be hard to work around not having it. > > Anyone else remember that? I can’t dredge up the details, sorry… > > In any event, a separate