On 10.06.2015 23:36, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: > On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 10:02:12PM +0100, Wols Lists wrote: >> Would it make sense to have a server dedicated to Heisenbugs? >> If a test triggers a heisenbug, disable it on most of them >> ... but try to >> instrument the heisenbug tester up the wazoo so that when it fails, there's a >> pile of logs to try and work out what went wrong. > > In theory yes, in practice hunting most Heisenbugs is not too effective. For > example, we still have over 300 bisected regressions. And quite a few of them > will have the same root cause as some Heisenbug: However, in general it is > much > easier to fix a well triaged regression than cutting through the haze and > finding the one precious hint hidden in piles and piles of logs.
it would perhaps be easier to track down Heisenbugs in tests with http://rr-project.org/ the tool has some limitations such as - only works on Linux x86/amd64 - the 3.2.0 release doesn't work with LO but current master build does - binaries have to be *identical*, so if you run it on a tinderbox you have to stop it until the heisenbug is debugged - due to the last point you can't add debug logging code after-the-fact, you'd have to record again until you hit the bug again to get the log - gdb conditional breakpoints are *really* slow if you set one in a location that is hit millions of times ... but determinism is nice when it works, and you can already record all JUnit based tests with "RR=1 make check" on master. _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice