(And, as an aside, I may just nuke the serial test runner anyway, since we can do it with a multi-worker runner with a single worker just fine, and reduce the code size --- I really don't see a good reason to keep the serial test runner strategy anymore except for a purely theoretical sense).
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Todd Fiala <todd.fi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Ying, > > I am speculating that the rerun logic issue where we saw the hang may be > more of a serial test runner issue. Would you mind if I re-enabled the > arm/aarch64 inclusion in the rerun logic now that I made a change based on > this speculation? It would be a relatively quick way to check if the > serial test runner is the issue, since now the rerun logic will not use the > serial test runner but rather the normal parallel runner with a single > worker (so, the same intent but expressed another way, using the test > runners we use all the time). If we still hit the issue, it is unrelated > to the serial test runner strategy. If we don't see the issue, then: (1) > great, we have a solution, and (2) I know I need to look into the serial > test runner strategy which may need some updates for recent changes. > > How does that sound? If I enable it and it times out, I'll just revert > the change and we'll go back to normal. (And I'll know more about the > issue, albeit with more investigation necessary). If it works just fine, > we'll leave it this way (and I'll know I need to look into the serial test > runner). > > -- > -Todd > -- -Todd
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
