[lldb-dev] LLDB tests

Sean Callanan via lldb-dev lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Jul 24 10:48:15 PDT 2017


since you asked about failures, here are some public bots you can look 
at to get a general sense of how we are doing:

  * http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders [various platforms]
  * http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/view/LLDB/job/lldb_build_test/ [OS X]
  * https://ci.swift.org/view/All/job/oss-lldb-incremental-osx/ [OS X]
  * https://ci.swift.org/view/All/job/oss-lldb-incremental-linux-ubuntu-16_10/

There are many more bots, as you'll discover browsing around, but these 
should give you a good idea of the health of our testsuite at any given 


On 7/24/17 3:03 AM, Steve Trotter via lldb-dev wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm fairly new to LLVM and LLDB, I became interested in this project 
> about 3 months back and I'm hoping to be able to contribute to 
> improving LLDB in time. I've been trying to get to grips with the code 
> and have been looking into the tests as a rough guide to how things 
> work, however I have some questions about the test suites in LLDB.
> It seems to me that we essentially have tests ran by the LIT runner 
> from LLVM core and tests ran by an LLDB specific python script 
> `dotest.py`. I notice that on the test page for LLDB they refer to the 
> `dotest.py` tests ran by a `ninja --check-lldb` but not the latter. I 
> also notice in an email titled "lldb-server tests" from Paval Labath 
> on 15th May 2017 suggests that the plan long term is to be to move 
> purely to using LIT style testing. Is this correct or have I 
> misunderstood? I did have a look in buildbot to see what tests are 
> being used and I can only find the `dotest.py` style tests, however 
> it's possible I've misunderstood something here, the 
> "lldb-x86_64-ubuntu-14.04-cmake" is not easy to make sense of I'm afraid.
> Also there seems only to be one test for lldb-server in the LIT suite 
> at present. Is there a reason for this at present, possibly along the 
> lines of we're still waiting for the ability to run tests remotely 
> using LIT as per this email thread? I couldn't find an obvious answer 
> as to whether a design was agreed upon for this and/or the work 
> completed, maybe it's an ongoing question still.
> Finally, I do see failures myself in both of these tests from the 
> latest build. I do tend to limit it to compiling only for X86 target 
> and I suspect this may be related, or possibly just something odd with 
> my build system anyway. Obviously in an ideal world these tests should 
> always pass but does anyone else have similar problems? I assume they 
> tend to pass for the core developers as it seems to be fairly LLVM 
> centric to ensure passing tests for new bits of work. I can send the 
> outputs of the failing tests if it's thought useful.
> Many thanks for your time,
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20170724/8bf5f6d4/attachment.html>

More information about the lldb-dev mailing list