[llvm-dev] buildbot failure in LLVM on clang-native-arm-cortex-a9

[Tobias Grosser via llvm-dev]

On 08/26/2015 06:46 PM, Philip Reames wrote:
> On 08/26/2015 09:41 AM, David Blaikie via llvm-dev wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org <mailto:renato.golin at linaro.org>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 26 August 2015 at 17:39, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com <mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>     > *shrug* I haven't looked at whatever specific bots are under discussion, but
>>     > I really wouldn't mind/would like if the bots had a more "revert to green"
>>     > feel to them just like we have for commits: take a bot offline,
>>     > fix/iterate/improve it, see if it comes good, then bring it back to the
>>     > mainline.
>>
>>     One needs a local buildmaster (which I recommend to all bot owners),
>>     but might not be trivial.
>>
>>
>> I wouldn't mind having a separate official build master (we could have a separate group on the main buildmaster, but I think that's insufficient - the visual noise there is still problematic) that hosts experimental bots.
> +1.  I think this would be a very workable solution.
>
> Since we three seem to now be in agreement, do we want to send a top level RFC and actually implement this?

I am not a big fan of this, as switching bots between experimental and production would then require restarting buildslaves
and pushing them to a different bot. Also, it will be impossible to run both an experimental and a production builder on the
same slave.

The following link hides all experimental builders:

http://lab.llvm.org:8011/console?category=clang&category=clang_fast&category=libcxx&category=lld&category=lldb&category=llvm&category=openmp&category=polly&category=sanitizer

We can add this link to the buildbot template (or just move the experimental ones further to the right).

Best,
Tobias