[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Can we remove llvmbb from IRC?

Tue Sep 1 13:20:00 PDT 2020

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 3:57 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 12:42 PM Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 3:32 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 12:07 PM Nico Weber via cfe-dev <
>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> llvmbb's job is to inform people of build breaks. However, it seems to
>>>> trigger for a big list of bots, and at least one of them seems to always be
>>>> broken,
>>>>
>>>
>>> If a bot is always broken it shouldn't be sending email/notifications -
>>> generally they are configured only to send email on green>red and red>green
>>> transitions, so if it's already broken you shouldn't be blamed for it. If
>>> you are seeing bot spam or emails from a bot that's already red, please
>>> email llvm-dev and the bot maintainer and ask the bot to be reconfigured or
>>> disabled.
>>>
>>> If a bot is regularly flakey (& thus sending email/notifications that
>>> are false-positives/that no one can act on) please also send email asking
>>> for the bot to be reconfigured or disabled. (or, if you want to be a bit
>>> more punchy - send a patch to the zorg repository to have the bot disabled
>>> & explain why you're proposing that)
>>>
>>
>> I agree with this in the abstract, but I get pinged completely reliably
>> at least twice after every single of my commits. This isn't something that
>> sometimes happens, it's something that always happens.
>>
>
> Could you point to specific buildbots/email when that comes up to help
> improve things both on IRC and email/mailing lists, etc?
>

Just land a change :) Or look at IRC scrollback. Given how easy it is to
find these problems, it doesn't seem like there's a lot of appetite for
improving this. Hence me asking about removing llvmbb (...and so far
everyone seems to be in favor).

In this case, from my IRC scrollback (there's more people on the blamelist,
spread over several follow-on IRC messages):

build #13975 of clang-ppc64le-linux-multistage is complete: Failure [failed
ninja check 1]  Build details are at
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64le-linux-multistage/builds/13975
 blamelist: LLVM GN Syncbot <llvmgnsyncbot at gmail.com>, Nico Weber <
thakis at chromium.org>

build #24132 of clang-with-thin-lto-ubuntu is complete: Failure [failed
test-stage1-compiler]  Build details are at
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-with-thin-lto-ubuntu/builds/24132
 blamelist: Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org>, Matt Arsenault <
Matthew.Arsenault at amd.com>, Eric Astor <epastor at google.com>, Craig Topper <
craig.topper at intel.com>, Alina

 build #2255 of lld-x86_64-win is complete: Failure [failed test-check-all]
 Build details are at
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lld-x86_64-win/builds/2255  blamelist:
LLVM GN Syncbot <llvmgnsyncbot at gmail.com>, Eric Astor <epastor at google.com>,
Craig Topper <craig.topper at intel.com>, Alina Sbirlea <asbirlea at google.com>,
Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org>, Amara

I also got email with pointers to:
http://green.lab.llvm.org/green//job/clang-stage1-RA/14180/consoleFull#-1417328700a1ca8a51-895e-46c6-af87-ce24fa4cd561

Chances are that there's something genuinely broken somewhere (maybe
compiler-rt?), but asking for concrete bots distracts from the point that
there's something broken on every single commit, which makes the bot just
let you know that you committed something in the last few hours.

>
>
>> and the broken bots tend to have cycle times of several hours.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Long cycle times are a real problem - that might be best left to another
>>> discussion about buildbot maintenance - I would be for a policy that says
>>> bot windows shouldn't be longer than, say, an hour or maybe less. (so, eg:
>>> if you have a bot that's just going to take 5 hours to run - then you need
>>> 5 machines that each pickup work every hour, so the blame lists are
>>> smaller) this doesn't solve the problem of being notified 5 hours later
>>> about a breakage that was caused by someone else who committed a few
>>> minutes before or after you. Solving that problem will require a much
>>> greater investment in infrastructure to chain buildbots, possibly use built
>>> artefacts from one buildbot to another, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>>> So if you're on IRC and you commit something, you get pinged by llvmbb
>>>> for hours afterwards.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone think llvmbb is useful?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I sometimes find it useful, but happy to move to llvm-build to get those
>>> notifications. Other folks might not know to do that, though.
>>>
>>>
>>>> The best thing about llvmbb I've heard it's easy to just "/ignore
>>>> llvmbb", but if that's what everybody does then why not not have it in the
>>>> first place?
>>>>
>>>> Nico
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> cfe-dev mailing list
>>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200901/aaf6f75f/attachment.html>