Ah yes I see. Thanks, Ying (and Siva! Saw your comments too). On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Ying Chen <chy...@google.com> wrote:
> Seems this is the first build that fails, and it only has one CL 255542 > <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/?view=rev&revision=255542>. > > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lldb-x86_64-ubuntu-14.04-cmake/builds/9446 > I believe Zachary is looking at that problem. > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Todd Fiala <todd.fi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I am seeing several failures on the Ubuntu 14.04 testbot, but >> unfortunately there are a number of changes that went in at the same time >> on that build. The failures I'm seeing are not appearing at all related to >> the test running infrastructure. >> >> Anybody with a fast Linux system able to take a look to see what exactly >> is failing there? >> >> -Todd >> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Todd Fiala <todd.fi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I just put in the single-worker, low-load, follow-up test run pass in >>> r255543. Most of the work for it went in late last week, this just mostly >>> flips it on. >>> >>> The feature works like this: >>> >>> * First test phase works as before: run all tests using whatever level >>> of concurrency is normally used. (e.g. 8 works on an 8-logical-core box). >>> >>> * Any timeouts, failures, errors, or anything else that would have >>> caused a test failure is eligible for rerun if either (1) it was marked as >>> a flakey test via the flakey decorator, or (2) if the --rerun-all-issues >>> command line flag is provided. >>> >>> * After the first test phase, if there are any tests that met rerun >>> eligibility that would have caused a test failure, those get run using a >>> serial test phase. Their results will overwrite (i.e. replace) the >>> previous result for the given test method. >>> >>> The net result should be that tests that were load sensitive and >>> intermittently fail during the first higher-concurrency test phase should >>> (in theory) pass in the second, single worker test phase when the test >>> suite is only using a single worker. This should make the test suite >>> generate fewer false positives on test failure notification, which should >>> make continuous integration servers (testbots) much more useful in terms of >>> generating actionable signals caused by version control changes to the lldb >>> or related sources. >>> >>> Please let me know if you see any issues with this when running the test >>> suite using the default output. I'd like to fix this up ASAP. And for >>> those interested in the implementation, I'm happy to do post-commit >>> review/changes as needed to get it in good shape. >>> >>> I'll be watching the builders now and will address any issues as I see >>> them. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> -- >>> -Todd >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> -Todd >> > > -- -Todd
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
