From: Matt Rice <ratmice@gmail.com>
To: Luis Machado <luis.machado@linaro.org>
Cc: "gdb@sourceware.org" <gdb@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Regressions getting more common
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 01:13:25 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACTLOFrC=VKNEphuyL6fsCJihSh=eQcc6n_L42eTi2wb-mBxYA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d1d61d0f-7f9e-2cf8-2f05-908638c2faab@linaro.org>
On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 5:06 PM Luis Machado via Gdb <gdb@sourceware.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't know about other non-x86 architectures, but over the past year
> I've been noticing more and more regressions being introduced,
> unnoticed, for ARM/AArch64. This is not good and causes a lot of pain if
> you have to keep tracking things manually, like we do now.
>
> The buildbots worked great for this very purpose, but Sergio has moved
> on to other duties (thanks for all the work!) and can't maintain it
> anymore. The builders are still there though, sitting mostly idle.
> We have a beefy ARM/AArch64 builder, which I can maintain for others to use.
>
> We can do better than to declare things OK after a single round of tests
> under x86, which has been the trend unfortunately.
>
> The subject of better CI has come up multiple times on IRC, with sad
> memories of the gerrit experiment's demise. Now we're left with review
> by e-mail and no broad testing.
>
Speaking of gerrit, I noticed that the server side git hooks, used by
https://git-repo.info/
for its repo -upload/git pull-request functionality has landed in git master,
and is slated to be in the next git release...
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git.git/commit/?id=6c430a647cb990fc856d328733fa59e1fafadb97
Which seems like an interesting new approach for this stuff.
> I think we need to discuss better validation pre-commit and possible CI
> solutions for GDB. It is pretty easy to exercise x86, but it doesn't
> sound fair to other architectures to have to keep cleaning up after
> things that have only been validated on that architecture.
>
> It would be great to establish a roadmap so we can get GDB's testing to
> today's standards, and maybe revisit the use of more modern patch review
> tools while at it.
>
> What do you think?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-14 1:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-13 17:05 Luis Machado
2020-10-14 1:13 ` Matt Rice [this message]
2020-10-14 14:46 ` Simon Marchi
2020-10-14 15:49 ` Matt Rice
2020-10-14 14:41 ` Simon Marchi
2020-10-14 15:50 ` Rainer Orth
2020-10-14 19:03 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2020-10-15 12:55 ` Luis Machado
2020-10-16 0:29 ` Simon Marchi
2020-10-14 15:14 ` Kamil Rytarowski
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='CACTLOFrC=VKNEphuyL6fsCJihSh=eQcc6n_L42eTi2wb-mBxYA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=ratmice@gmail.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=luis.machado@linaro.org \
/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).