<div dir="ltr">Could the device be removed from testing? (is it likely the device that's at fault, more than the test - or is it a truly representative, valid device where any device in that configuration would have this problem and it's a supported configuration (not too old, etc)?)</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:38 PM Evgenii Stepanov via llvm-commits <<a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">For some value of x, p^x is low enough :)<br>
<br>
Seriously speaking, the test is failing on a particular device and I<br>
suspect it could be a kernel issue: it is running 3.10, which is quite<br>
old. I don't have time to debug it, but I could make the test as<br>
failing on (android && i686) which is not the real cause of the error,<br>
but it would make the bot green and keep the test exercised on the<br>
arm-android device.<br>
<br>
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Rui Ueyama via llvm-commits<br>
<<a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> You cannot fix a flakey test by just running it more than once, can you? I<br>
> mean, the probability of test failure decreases from p to p^3, but it is<br>
> still not zero.<br>
><br>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Vitaly Buka via llvm-commits<br>
> <<a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> It does not makes test slower as it passes on all platforms from the first<br>
>> time.<br>
>><br>
>> We don't suspect issues with functionally, rather some specific platform<br>
>> bug.<br>
>> Also on Android we know only one device were it fails. And I guess it<br>
>> fails only in Asan mode?<br>
>> So if we mark it unsupported, it should be very specific.<br>
>> E.g. // UNSUPPORTED: android && asan && x86 (not sure if that one is 64bit<br>
>> and how we exactly recognize x86 on android)<br>
>><br>
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:49 PM, David Blaikie via llvm-commits<br>
>> <<a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> If this functionality isn't reliable on Android, I think<br>
>>> UNSUPPORTED/XFAIL is more appropriate than deflaking like this. The<br>
>>> functionality's no good if it fails that much, so why test/support it,<br>
>>> making tests slower and risk flakiness creeping in on other platforms due to<br>
>>> the more generous testing?<br>
>>><br>
>>> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 4:57 PM Evgeniy Stepanov via llvm-commits<br>
>>> <<a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Author: eugenis<br>
>>>> Date: Fri Oct 13 16:57:08 2017<br>
>>>> New Revision: 315777<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> URL: <a href="http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=315777&view=rev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=315777&view=rev</a><br>
>>>> Log:<br>
>>>> [asan] Deflake one test by running it 3 times.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> The test seems to trigger an android platform bug under load.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Modified:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> compiler-rt/trunk/test/sanitizer_common/TestCases/Linux/allow_user_segv.cc<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Modified:<br>
>>>> compiler-rt/trunk/test/sanitizer_common/TestCases/Linux/allow_user_segv.cc<br>
>>>> URL:<br>
>>>> <a href="http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/compiler-rt/trunk/test/sanitizer_common/TestCases/Linux/allow_user_segv.cc?rev=315777&r1=315776&r2=315777&view=diff" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/compiler-rt/trunk/test/sanitizer_common/TestCases/Linux/allow_user_segv.cc?rev=315777&r1=315776&r2=315777&view=diff</a><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> ==============================================================================<br>
>>>> ---<br>
>>>> compiler-rt/trunk/test/sanitizer_common/TestCases/Linux/allow_user_segv.cc<br>
>>>> (original)<br>
>>>> +++<br>
>>>> compiler-rt/trunk/test/sanitizer_common/TestCases/Linux/allow_user_segv.cc<br>
>>>> Fri Oct 13 16:57:08 2017<br>
>>>> @@ -4,16 +4,34 @@<br>
>>>> // clang-format off<br>
>>>> // RUN: %clangxx -O0 %s -o %t<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=0 not %run %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s<br>
>>>> --check-prefix=CHECK0 || \<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=0 not %run %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s<br>
>>>> --check-prefix=CHECK0 || \<br>
>>>> // RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=0 not %run %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s<br>
>>>> --check-prefix=CHECK0<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=1 not %run %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s<br>
>>>> --check-prefix=CHECK1 || \<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=1 not %run %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s<br>
>>>> --check-prefix=CHECK1 || \<br>
>>>> // RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=1 not %run %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s<br>
>>>> --check-prefix=CHECK1<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=2 not %run %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s<br>
>>>> --check-prefix=CHECK2 || \<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=2 not %run %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s<br>
>>>> --check-prefix=CHECK2 || \<br>
>>>> // RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=2 not %run %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s<br>
>>>> --check-prefix=CHECK2<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=0:allow_user_segv_handler=0 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK0 || \<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=0:allow_user_segv_handler=0 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK0 || \<br>
>>>> // RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=0:allow_user_segv_handler=0 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK0<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=1:allow_user_segv_handler=0 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK2 || \<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=1:allow_user_segv_handler=0 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK2 || \<br>
>>>> // RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=1:allow_user_segv_handler=0 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK2<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=2:allow_user_segv_handler=0 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK2 || \<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=2:allow_user_segv_handler=0 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK2 || \<br>
>>>> // RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=2:allow_user_segv_handler=0 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK2<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=0:allow_user_segv_handler=1 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK0 || \<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=0:allow_user_segv_handler=1 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK0 || \<br>
>>>> // RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=0:allow_user_segv_handler=1 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK0<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=1:allow_user_segv_handler=1 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK1 || \<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=1:allow_user_segv_handler=1 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK1 || \<br>
>>>> // RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=1:allow_user_segv_handler=1 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK1<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=2:allow_user_segv_handler=1 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK2 || \<br>
>>>> +// RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=2:allow_user_segv_handler=1 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK2 || \<br>
>>>> // RUN: %env_tool_opts=handle_segv=2:allow_user_segv_handler=1 not %run<br>
>>>> %t 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK2<br>
>>>> // clang-format on<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> @@ -21,9 +39,6 @@<br>
>>>> // XFAIL: msan<br>
>>>> // XFAIL: tsan<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> -// Flaky errors in debuggerd with "waitpid returned unexpected pid (0)"<br>
>>>> in logcat.<br>
>>>> -// UNSUPPORTED: android<br>
>>>> -<br>
>>>> #include <signal.h><br>
>>>> #include <stdio.h><br>
>>>> #include <stdlib.h><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>>> llvm-commits mailing list<br>
>>>> <a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
>>>> <a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits</a><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> llvm-commits mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits</a><br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> llvm-commits mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits</a><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> llvm-commits mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits</a><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
llvm-commits mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits</a><br>
</blockquote></div>