[LLVMdev] Validation Update
dag at cray.com
Thu Nov 20 15:07:57 PST 2008
On Thursday 20 November 2008 16:59, Tanya M. Lattner wrote:
> > It's all in the proposal I posted a week or so ago.
> Yes, your proposal said that the community must agree on the set of tests
> used to validate it. You haven't said what the conclusion was. Also, in
True enough. My assumption is we'll figure that out soon. I'll post a
separate thread to start the discussion.
> your proposal you did not specify what reference point you were going to
> use. Not everything in llvm-test passes. I will suggest that you use a
> release to get a starting reference point.
I'd rather not have to track individual regressions between releases. I'd
rather just pick a set of tests that passes now and add to that as more things
> >> What are the pros and cons of this? How much does it tax the server?
> > It's an extra TCP connection out to the buildbot on every commit. I
> > would think that would be low cost compared to all the other processing
> > that has to go on.
> I'll have to talk to some people about this before committing to getting
> this done. So ping me later.
> > I can certainly ask. I'll let you know what I hear but be mindful that
> > if someone else steps up to coordinate validations, Cray isn't going to
> > give them access to an internal machine. That means we'd have to revisit
> > this question in the future to find another home. I'd rather put this
> > somewhere that is under control of the wider LLVM community. I think
> > that's more in the interest of the LLVM community.
> This is exactly why we can't do it at LLVM. We can't give arbitrary people
Fair enough. Can anyone else help out here?
More information about the llvm-dev