similar to: Buildbots stuck?

Hi Paula, This error is fine. The buildbot has tested the worker version. 0.8.x apparently does not have that method. The error gets handled gracefully on the server side. At least it seems so so far. That should not prevent your bot from connecting. Thanks Galina On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 2:11 PM Paula Askar <paulatoth at google.com> wrote: > Hey Andrzej, > > What are you seeing

Our Flang-aarch64 buildbots just won't connect to the main Buildbot master anymore. I switched them to the staging buildbot master instead and it seems fine for now. Is there anything that we can/should tweak at our end? http://lab.llvm.org:8014/#/waterfall?tags=flang -Andrzej On 08/10/2020 00:31, Galina Kistanova via cfe-dev wrote: > They are online now -

It looks like all sanitizer builder are still offline http://lab.llvm.org:8011/#/builders On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 at 00:34, Galina Kistanova via cfe-commits < cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > The staging buildbot was up and running for 6 days now, and looks good. > > Tomorrow at 12:00 PM PDT we will switch the production buildbot to the new >

Hi Galina, I have observed that some of my bots timeout for no apparent reason (no external load, no network mishaps, no issues), and when I go to check the buildslave process, I see that it has just being restarted. Do you know what could be causing this? Swap is untouched, plenty of disk left, CPUs a plenty. So, I'm contemplating the possibility that the master lost connectivity to it and

On 13 October 2015 at 21:51, Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> wrote: > Could you point me please (what bots and when did this happen)? http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv7-a15/builds/6793 > I will look. Thanks! I may be wrong, but this is not the first phantom issue I had to chase recently. :) Just want to make sure there wasn't anything from your side

I'd like to take code ownership of the LLVM Buildbot code. Thanks Galina

Hello everyone, The buildbot upgrade is entering the phase when the results to become visible. No change is required at this time on any of the builders. The bot owners could upgrade the buildbot on build computers later, at their convenience, as this is not on the critical path. We are going to upgrade the staging bot first. Then, once that is stable and all detected issues are resolved, we

kinda random, but do we have a centralized list of all of the buildbots? I see a lot of different URL's in IRC, but no list so I can check "all of the waterfalls". I'm not talking about the specific bots (e.g. llvm-x86_64-ubuntu) but the "fleets" (e.g.http://lab.llvm.org). Could you maybe add a little bulleted list (or link to a list) to docs/HowToAddABuilder.rst?

On 13 October 2015 at 22:28, don hinton <hintonda at gmail.com> wrote: > However, the build that failed thought it needed to do 106 steps. It hung > on the 83 that didn't exist. Interesting... > Could this be a cmake/ninja issue? It could. Those bots are not cleaning between builds (or it would take hours). If that's what's happening, I'll have to re-think my

Switched all but PPC, I don't have access to them. But they run the same script as sanitizer-x86_64-linux. http://lab.llvm.org:8014/#/waterfall?tags=sanitizer On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 at 19:19, Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> wrote: > We have a better version of AnnotatedCommand on the staging. It should be > a functional equivalent of the old one. > We need to stress

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

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: > kinda random, but do we have a centralized list of all of the > buildbots? I see a lot of different URL's in IRC, but no list so I can > check "all of the waterfalls". I'm not talking about the specific bots > (e.g. llvm-x86_64-ubuntu) but the "fleets"

Thanks, Galina. It doesn't explain why the test worked on some bots but not this one, but Justin's workaround is okay with me. --paulr From: Galina Kistanova [mailto:gkistanova at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2017 10:09 AM To: Robinson, Paul Cc: Davide Italiano; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Problem with 'sed' on one Windows bot? There is nothing

On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 at 21:05, JF Bastien via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > The patch is about ready to land, which means any older compiler will soft-error (which you can turn off with LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN). I think we should then cherry-pick the patch to the LLVM 8 branch. > > The last remaining issue are the buildbots. I audited *all* bots in

On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 4:32 PM Galina Kistanova via lldb-commits < lldb-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > They are online now - http://lab.llvm.org:8011/#/waterfall?tags=sanitizer > > AnnotatedCommand has severe design conflict with the new buildbot. > We have changed it to be safe and still do something useful, but it will > need more love and care. > > Please let me

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, 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

Galina and Takumi, Are we ready to update the minimum required version to 2.8.12.2? -Chris > On Feb 12, 2015, at 2:35 PM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote: > > Chandler's feedback was that we should go to 2.8.12.2 instead of 3.0 because of Ubuntu's LTS release. > > -Chris > > > > On Feb 12, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Galina Kistanova <gkistanova

On 31 October 2016 at 19:46, Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> wrote: > I applied it and reconfigured the master. Thanks Galina! Marco, the build is complaining about Ninja: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-bpf-build/builds/414/steps/cmake%20stage%201/logs/stdio CMake was unable to find a build program corresponding to "Ninja" Now I remember we used ninja by