From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-4022.proton.ch (mail-4022.proton.ch [185.70.40.22]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 247DE3858D28 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 16:00:24 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 247DE3858D28 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=vrany.io Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=vrany.io Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 16:00:12 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=vrany.io; s=protonmail3; t=1674057622; x=1674316822; bh=xKsQ+cSwQDRstgHA7/yiEvw4V/2OLiKxbaBjsnEfjLo=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=FRuNbR3w/ThMm3WlXKjXDr6lZZehV9vKOIo1cYgYYvvAwSwDpfOSKbWp4XucL8UHL Rwfuw1EOsirdgB7jAEfVdm6BprkLo0z3qAwoZ5/rAxxVE9xmnV/L5u2iUqFIgzZlJr wjAx0Pysqqz1nzZZ0D0JA516mPpJr1xM7eBpJpnRkS1XAInrOrHw22yL+wu1asddEj U1/OBYr8JLbdX75kpRUKapHmBf8WiMdogShhdYr1GLS6hx2wUGHUxaY73qNnHqeNlP gLmIEEuKgix2gyQjhKpCevOB0i9pw6SBeAQalzoiwjZH716gDKgTDqh9fmRwVPXnFQ +QFDCXVQGWkIQ== To: Simon Marchi , GDB mailing list From: Jan Vrany Subject: Re: CI scripts Message-ID: <29aa46326e96d373dff8c20d0ad5d9c948d05a7c.camel@vrany.io> In-Reply-To: References: <591347cb638e9fcbc15478691e13e9c0664e3537.camel@vrany.io> Feedback-ID: 40767693:user:proton MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Wed, 2023-01-18 at 08:36 -0500, Simon Marchi wrote: > > On 1/18/23 07:09, Jan Vrany via Gdb wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > > > On Thu, 2023-01-12 at 08:55 -0500, Simon Marchi wrote: > > > > > > On 1/12/23 07:56, Jan Vrany via Gdb wrote: > > > > Hi Simon, > > > > > > > > about a month ago when you helped me with use-after-free fix > > > > you wrote: > > > > > > > > > I ran the patch through my CI job, looks good. > > > > > > > > I'm wondering whether the CI scripts for your job are available? > > > > I'd like to setup a similar job on my CI to avoid similar problems > > > > in future. > > > > > > > > I'm especially interested in "configure ..." and "make check ..." > > > > commands. > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > > Hi Jan, > > > > > > Yes, it's on Jenkins, the job description (it uses Jenkins Job Builde= r) > > > is here: > > > > > > https://github.com/simark/lttng-ci/blob/master/jobs/binutils-gdb.yaml > > > > > > The build script is runs is here (which is where the commands you are > > > intereted in are): > > > > > > https://github.com/simark/lttng-ci/blob/master/scripts/binutils-gdb/b= uild.sh > > > > > > > Perfect, thanks a lot! I managed to setup a job on my CI. I just call y= our > > script to build GDB and run and process test. > > > > There's one little thing - the script uses `--with-guile=3Dguile-2.2`. = My build > > nodes have no guile-2.2, only `guile` which is an alias for `guile-3.0`= so I > > have to patch the script to use just `--with-guile`. > > Oh, I'll update to just --with-guile and let the system pick the default > guile. Thanks! > > I just noticed I provided you links to my personal fork, which is not up > to date. The files on the real repo are more up to date: > > https://github.com/lttng/lttng-ci/blob/master/scripts/binutils-gdb/build.= sh Thanks, I have updated my job to get build.sh from this repo. > > Notably, this version generates a gdb.fail.sum, which contains just the > tests that caused the build to be considered a failure. So it's only > FAILs/UNRESOLVEDs/XPASSes/DUPLICATEs, after filtering out the known > pre-existing ones. > > > > The job itself is hosted here: > > > > > > https://ci.lttng.org/view/GDB/job/binutils-gdb_master_linuxbuild/ > > > > Thanks! Interestingly, my build of 1b1be68b9 (using your script) shows > > only 6 failures wheres "your" [1] build shows 72750 failures... > > I don't know, if you use -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG (like the script does), you > should see loads of failures in the C++ tests. I reported the problem > here, and it should go back to normal once Tom provides a fix. > > https://inbox.sourceware.org/gdb-patches/871qnt2bob.fsf@tromey.com/T/#mce= b9a4e339cd209f7b6d8d361ac5b4523d71635c > > I have some local modifications to the result parsing script, which I > need to clean up and push, so maybe there's a bit of difference in how > the results are analyzed. I wrote the job so it uses the exact same script as you're using so yes, I do use -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG. After updating the repo from your fork to upstream I do see loads of failur= es as well. Once fixed, it should get back to normal for me too. Thanks!=C2=A0 Jan