[lldb-dev] marking new summary output for expected timeouts

[Todd Fiala via lldb-dev]

Great.  Actually there is a latent bug in there we hit yesterday, when
there is a platform set but it doesn't start with "remote-" (we assume the
match result has a first matched group and blow up).  I'll submit a patch
that both fixes that up and strips out the darwin ones.  I think the rerun
logic now fully covers us on the Darwin side.

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Pavel Labath <labath at google.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have removed all of our expected timeouts from dosep.py (there are
> still some freebsd and darwin ones left, but I don't know If anyone is
> looking at those), so I think we're not using any part of the old test
> runner at the moment. All clear for removal on our part.
>
> pl
>
>
> On 14 December 2015 at 16:06, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Oh yeah, that's fine.  I won't take that code out.
> >
> > Hmm at least some of the builds went through this weekend, I made a
> number
> > of changes Saturday morning (US Pacific time) that I saw go through the
> > Ubuntu 14.04 cmake bot.
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Pavel Labath <labath at google.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> we've had an unrelated breaking change, so the buildbots were red over
> >> the weekend. I've fixed it now, and it seems to be turning green.
> >> We've also had power outage during the weekend and not all of the
> >> buildbots are back up yet, as we need to wait for MTV to wake up. I'd
> >> like to give this at least one more day, to give them a chance to
> >> stabilize. Is this blocking you from making further changes to the
> >> test event system?
> >>
> >> pl
> >>
> >> On 12 December 2015 at 00:20, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hey Pavel and/or Tamas,
> >> >
> >> > Let me know when we're definitely all clear on the expected timeout
> >> > support
> >> > I added to the (now once again) newer default test results.
> >> >
> >> > As soon as we don't need the legacy summary results anymore, I'm going
> >> > to
> >> > strip out the code that manages it.  It is quite messy and duplicates
> >> > the
> >> > content that is better handled by the test event system.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks!
> >> >
> >> > -Todd
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I went ahead and added the expected timeout support in r255363.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm going to turn back on the new BasicResultsFormatter as the
> default.
> >> >> We can flip this back off if it is still not doing everything we
> need,
> >> >> but I
> >> >> *think* we cover the issue you saw now.
> >> >>
> >> >> -Todd
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Hi Pavel,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I'm going to adjust the new summary output for expected timeouts.  I
> >> >>> hope
> >> >>> to do that in the next hour or less.  I'll put that in and flip the
> >> >>> default
> >> >>> back on for using the new summary output.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I'll do those two changes separately, so you can revert the flip
> back
> >> >>> on
> >> >>> to flip it back off if we still have an issue.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Sound good?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> (This can be orthogonal to the new work to mark up expected
> timeouts).
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> -Todd
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> -Todd
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > -Todd
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -Todd
>



-- 
-Todd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20160121/34d3ee65/attachment.html>