From: Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@arm.com>
To: Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>
Cc: Matthias Klose <matthias.klose@canonical.com>,
Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>,
binutils@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: The 2.40 branch has been created
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 18:29:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2351b01b-ace6-3028-ece5-0f47caf21950@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230102230528.GA6490@gnu.wildebeest.org>
On 1/3/23 00:05, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi Christophe,
>
> On Mon, Jan 02, 2023 at 04:59:40PM +0100, Christophe Lyon via Binutils wrote:
>> Thanks for catching this, I've just realized that Sourceware's
>> buildbot only runs a subset of binutils tests, which explains why
>> this wasn't noticed before.
>
> Ah, yeah, sorry. That is because the armhf builder still has debian
> old-stable installed, which had multiple ld tests failing (and it is
> pretty slow), so it only runs the binutils and gas testsuites, not the
> ld one.
>
> We could use your armhf_ubuntu20_04_worker or ubuntu20_04_armhf_worker
> to also run the binutils builds/tests.
>
Actually we have:
armhf-ubuntu20_04 and armhf-ubuntu22_04 to build GDB and
ubuntu22_04-armhf to build GCC
The containers we use to build GDB have less cores than the ones we use
for GCC. If we add binutils builders on the same workers as GDB, will
they cooperate nicely (as in "do not compete for CPU", ie. be scheduled
at different times)?
If yes, maybe it makes sense to add binutils builders to:
armhf-ubuntu20_04
armhf-ubuntu22_04
arm64-ubuntu20_04
arm64-ubuntu22_04
WDYT?
Thanks,
Christophe
> Cheers,
>
> Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-03 17:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-31 13:00 Nick Clifton
2023-01-02 11:41 ` Matthias Klose
2023-01-02 11:56 ` Matthias Klose
2023-01-02 12:03 ` Andreas Schwab
2023-01-02 15:59 ` Christophe Lyon
2023-01-02 23:05 ` Mark Wielaard
2023-01-03 17:29 ` Christophe Lyon [this message]
2023-01-04 0:35 ` Mark Wielaard
2023-01-04 10:31 ` Christophe Lyon
2023-01-04 11:07 ` Mark Wielaard
2023-01-09 16:00 ` Christophe Lyon
2023-01-04 12:16 ` Nick Alcock
2023-01-10 12:43 ` Nick Alcock
2023-01-04 3:05 ` Alan Modra
2023-01-04 9:36 ` Nick Clifton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2351b01b-ace6-3028-ece5-0f47caf21950@arm.com \
--to=christophe.lyon@arm.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=mark@klomp.org \
--cc=matthias.klose@canonical.com \
--cc=nickc@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).