[llvm-dev] PSA: debuginfo-tests workflow changing slightly

[Chris Matthews via llvm-dev]

Nothing about the change is complex, it is just far reaching.  It looks like we have 69 builds using the repo internally, and 26 on green dragon.  We would have to convert them in bulk (with a Jenkins shutdowns), then each will have to be verified.  To further complicate things, the debuginfo-tests repo is not branched with the compiler, so we have to back port the cmake changes to all previous branches we still run.

> On Nov 6, 2017, at 10:51 AM, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 10:38 AM Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com <mailto:paul.robinson at sony.com>> wrote:
> IIUC you are mainly wanting to test LLD's PDB generation.  Obviously a test suite plugged in under clang/test is not a good fit for that.  It could arguably fit into the LLD project, but separating it out as a more end-to-end integration project a-la test-suite seems like a much better idea.
> 
>  
> 
> Moving debuginfo-tests seems like a way to get a project in place with the right layering and maybe some lit infrastructure to make writing tests simpler.  This tactic appears to have a broader impact than you thought, or even I thought, if it's going to take somebody with MikeE's skills a week to get it running, mostly, in Apple's environment.
> 
>  
> 
> How about this alternative:  Set up a new project (preferably with a name that won't cause confusion with llvm/test/DebugInfo) that copies all the fiddly bits you need from debuginfo-tests, and which lands in the right layering place.  Over time you can move individual tests from debuginfo-tests to the new place.  Eventually debuginfo-tests will be empty, and we nuke it.  Is there a serious downside to working it that way?
> 
>  
> 
> This puts more of the burden on you, to conjure up a whole new project, but you're the one who wants it, so that seems fair.  J  Then the people with more complicated CI setups, like Apple and Sony, can add the new thing at their leisure without worrying about the kind of disruption that ChrisM anticipates.  It's not like the SCM history of debuginfo-tests is all that important; it's a *really* small project.
> 
> --paulr
> 
> 
> I'm honestly not opposed to this idea.  It just seems a shame to do this for purely logistical reasons if most people agree that the "right" place for debuginfo-tests is outside of the clang tree. 
> 
> That said, I'd still like to hear from ChrisM and MikeE about why it will take so long, because on the surface it seems like a low-impact move.
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171106/098be168/attachment.html>