[lldb-dev] [zorg] r214540 - Fixed mergefunc builder configure; added lldb builder for FreeBSD.
Rick Foos
rfoos at codeaurora.org
Thu May 14 09:22:23 PDT 2015
Small note, you can control emails sent by builder.
For example, I did not include my experimental builders in the email
notification.
By the same token, you could add a custom notifier for any experimental
builder that you individually want to watch without going to a web site.
The remaining problem is that the experimental builder failures appear
on lab.llvm.org:8011.
Rick
InformativeMailNotifier(
fromaddr = "llvm.buildmaster at lab.llvm.org",
sendToInterestedUsers= False,
extraRecipients =
["rfoos at codeaurora.org","llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com"],
subject="Build %(builder)s Failure",
mode = "failing",
b*uilders = ["llvm-hexagon-elf","clang-hexagon-elf"],*
addLogs=False,
num_lines = 15),
On 05/14/2015 04:38 AM, Tamas Berghammer wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Galina Kistanova
> <gkistanova at gmail.com <mailto:gkistanova at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> >> Will our rotations alias still get failure emails like it does now?
> ...
> > Galina should be able to answer this
>
> What is the "rotations alias"?
>
>
> From the buildbot perspective it is an additional e-mail address where
> it sends a notification for each failed build (based on
> an InformativeMailNotifier
> in buildbot/osuosl/master/config/status.py:125). It is a special
> e-mail address what will forward the failure notification to the right
> people inside the LLDB team at Google based on some settings but it
> isn't effect the way the buildbot have to handle it.
>
> > could we disable IRC notification for these buildbots as well?
>
> I will disable IRC notifications for experimental bots today, if
> everything will go well.
>
> Thanks
>
> Galina
>
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 10:44 AM, David Blaikie
> <dblaikie at gmail.com <mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Vince Harron
> <vince at nethacker.com <mailto:vince at nethacker.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> I agree that it needs to be fixed. Thanks for
> communicating the issue.
>
> I've submitted a change that XFAILs timeout tests. This
> should make lldb-x86_64-ubuntu-14.04-cmake solid (fingers
> crossed).
>
> Will our rotations alias still get failure emails like it
> does now?
>
>
> Galina should be able to answer this - I'm not sure on the
> exact setup, but that seems like a reasonable/right
> configuration. The main/only thing I care about is not
> notifying random contributors (or the IRC channel, which is
> equivalent) on a bot that's not pretty reliable (granted, my
> GDB 7.5 buildbot has some flaky tests in it that come up once
> a week or so - and I wouldn't mind being held to this bar
> myself, I've meant/tried to disable those at various points
> but never quite pushed through)
>
> - David
>
>
>
> Vince
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 4:27 PM, David Blaikie
> <dblaikie at gmail.com <mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Galina Kistanova
> <gkistanova at gmail.com <mailto:gkistanova at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Vince,
>
> Maybe "experimental" is not the best word to name
> the group. Anyway, the actual meaning is a group
> of builders which does not send e-mail
> notifications to the blame list on a failure after
> a green or interrupted build.
> These builders are shown in the UI as usual,
> though, on the waterfall page they are at the
> right. The IRC notifications are sent on every
> builder status change.
> The builders of this group builds on demand only.
> I think this is not a desired behavior in this
> case. We still want these builders to build on
> regular commits to the dependent projects, I
> guess. This is an easy change. I'll make it as well.
>
>
> Thanks, that'd be great - could we disable IRC
> notification for these buildbots as well?
>
> Originally, the purpose of this group is just like
> that - someone introduce a new builder, work out
> all possible issues and make it reliably green,
> before it gets to a pool of regular builders and
> gets noisy.
> The major issue with an unreliable builder is
> people get annoyed and stop pay attention to the
> failures. It would take quite an effort to get the
> situation back to normal.
>
>
> Indeed - the greater risk is people start ignoring
> other, valid buildbot email from reliable builders
> because it gets lost in the noise of the unreliable
> ones. That's why I'd be happy to aggressively mark as
> experimental (or any other approach) any buildbot
> that's producing particularly unhelpful notifications
> (email or IRC) or otherwise clouding the feedback
> these tools should be providing.
>
> If someone is willing to put up with an unreliable
> builder and triage the failures manually - they can
> always forward the real failures to the mailing list,
> cc'ing whoever's appropriate, etc. But it shouldn't be
> every developer's job to figure out whether any bot
> email is valid or not.
>
>
> - David
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Galina
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Vince Harron
> <vince at nethacker.com <mailto:vince at nethacker.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Before you move them, can you explain what
> experimental means?
>
> The Linux builder does have some flakey builds
> and I'm working on that right now.
>
> I'm one test away from getting OSX green. I
> would like to see how it does.
>
> We are doing a bringup on the android builder
> right now, it makes sense to move that
> somewhere else.
>
> Also, it would be very much appreciated to
> include lldb-dev when discussing lldb issues.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Vince
>
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Galina
> Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com
> <mailto:gkistanova at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> >Perhaps everything should go in experimental
> first & only moved out once they've got a
> track record of success.
> Yes, this is good idea. I will move them
> to experimental.
>
> Thanks
>
> Galina
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:45 AM, David
> Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com
> <mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 6:28 AM, Ed
> Maste <emaste at freebsd.org
> <mailto:emaste at freebsd.org>> wrote:
>
> On 11 May 2015 at 22:52, Galina
> Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com
> <mailto:gkistanova at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > I'm not sure I follow the
> discussion.
> >
> > Which builder are we talking
> about? Is it lldb-x86_64-freebsd?
>
> A few different things are being
> discussed in this thread.
> lldb-x86_64-freebsd is the
> specific one of interest to me,
> but the
> lldb builders are in general
> unreliable.
>
> > There were 3 failure e-mail
> notifications related to this
> particular builder
> > during the last month. The last
> notification looks valid, since
> the build
> > went from green to red
> >
> (http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lldb-x86_64-freebsd/builds/5589
> vs.
> >
> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lldb-x86_64-freebsd/builds/5588).
>
> That green-to-red is almost
> certainly general flakiness, not
> directly
> related to the changes in build 5589.
>
> > ...
> > Or we are talking about all the
> builders in the whole "lldb"
> category? If
> > so, let's agree on how it should
> behave from the notification
> perspective,
> > and I'll configure it to do so.
> >
> > In general, any unreliable
> builder should be in the
> "experimental" category.
> > These are not sending
> notifications at all.
>
> It seems the unreliability /
> flakiness applies to all of the lldb
> builders, other than the Windows
> ones which only build-test. Does it
> make sense to apply the
> experimental category to all of
> them for now?
>
>
> Perhaps everything should go in
> experimental first & only moved out
> once they've got a track record of
> success. (& I wouldn't mind bumping a
> lot of existing builders back down to
> that category)
>
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> <mailto:llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> <mailto:llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
--
Rick Foos
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20150514/c9782a8f/attachment.html>
More information about the lldb-dev
mailing list