[llvm-dev] MLIR Buildbot configuration

Christian K├╝hnel via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Aug 3 00:33:42 PDT 2020


Hi folks,

happy to set it to batch mode, if someone tells me where to configure it :)

Otherwise we could also upgrade the machine from 16 to 32 cores, if you
would like to get more build results. Or do both...


Best,
Christian


On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 1:05 AM Stephen Neuendorffer via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> +1 for batching.  In practice it's probably more important that things get
> run for every MLIR checkin, and not necessarily for every LLVM checkin.
>
> Steve
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 9:26 AM Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Indeed there is quite a backlog here right now:
>> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/mlir-windows and here
>> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/mlir-nvidia
>> I agree that 17 hours of latency is likely too high to justify the
>> non-batching.
>>
>> Note that the bots are doing `ninja` first followed by `ninja
>> check-mlir`: they likely build much more than they need: the build could be
>> faster by avoiding the first step.
>>
>> --
>> Mehdi
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 9:05 AM Johannes Doerfert <
>> johannesdoerfert at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> I broke the MLIR build yesterday and the two Flang bots told me about it
>>> pretty much right away. Yay!
>>> That is how I always thought the setup should work (modulo that we all
>>> try not to break builds).
>>> Today I got emails from an MLIR bot and I was a bit confused. I looked
>>> at the configuration of the two
>>> MLIR bots and it seems they test commits one by one, with the backlog
>>> that you would expect.
>>> I was wondering if my observation is correct and if this is the desired
>>> behavior?
>>> I don't necessarily think such a setup is bad but both MLIR bots run it
>>> this way, which might catch
>>> more problems but with a longer delay, unsure if it is worth it.
>>>
>>>
>>> I figured I bring this up but I'm fine when people don't see the need
>>> for change (or more bots).
>>>
>>>
>>> ~ Johannes
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://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/20200803/59df2710/attachment.html>


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list