[lldb-dev] mind if I try allowing reruns on arm/aarch64?
Todd Fiala via lldb-dev
lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Dec 17 14:47:52 PST 2015
I just put this change in that reverted the aarch64 and arm removal from
I'll watch this builder
and see what happens. If it hangs on reruns, I'll revert r255935.
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:
> Excellent. I'll try this in the afternoon. I need to run out now but
> I'll check in what we discussed later on when I get back.
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Ying Chen <chying at google.com> wrote:
>> Yes, you could use android builder to run that experiment.
>> Please watch test 7 of this builder
>> <http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lldb-x86_64-ubuntu-14.04-android/> after
>> your change goes in(Another test for aarch64 which was previously timed out
>> has been disabled for offline debugging of other unrelated problems).
>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
>>> (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.fiala at gmail.com>
>>>> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the lldb-dev