[PATCH] D14866: [zorg] Add support for uploading artifacts to the 'llvmlab bisect' bucket and enable this for clang-cmake-mips.

Fri Nov 27 06:54:54 PST 2015

dsanders marked 2 inline comments as done.
dsanders added a comment.

In http://reviews.llvm.org/D14866#297725, @chatur01 wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
> FWIW, I had a near identical patch locally (making the same decision to add an extra keyword argument, etc...) so it LGTM.
>  My only interpretation of Galina's suggestion was to create a new function called `getClangGCSBuildFactory(...)` that calls
>  `getClangBuildFactory(...)` and then adds the extra upload step. I don't see what benefit that would bring TBH. Hopefully Galina can clarify.

As far as I know it's only possible to append steps to a factory so I think I'd have to duplicate or split the function.

> Have you acquired the relevant credentials to use `gsutil` like this? I asked a while back, and was told I need to make sure

>  everything works OK with my own GCS account before pushing to the official GCS. Unfortunately I'm blocked getting a GCS

>  internally, I'd be interested in hearing what policy you followed to get this commit-ready.

>  If you've demonstrated this works, then that should allow the rest of us Buildbot users to follow your lead and get our builds into the cloud as well.

I've got the config and I've checked it works by uploading a file and deleting it again.

To get it ready, I tested it with a private buildbot using the zorg scripts and modifications to disable mail and most of the builders/slaves. I'm using a newer version of buildbot but I don't think I've used anything new. On the GCS side, it turned out I didn't need to go through an approval process so long as I didn't spend any money :-). I therefore used the free trial. I've tested phased builders and some of the 'llvmlab bisect' commands. I haven't tried an actual bisect, but I have confirmed the filenames and tarball contents are the same as the two builders that are already uploading.

http://reviews.llvm.org/D14866