From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [129.70.160.84]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8E57385E83D for ; Thu, 1 Jul 2021 12:08:41 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org D8E57385E83D Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7ABF1CA9; Thu, 1 Jul 2021 14:08:40 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B-ZT8wz7QDk5; Thu, 1 Jul 2021 14:08:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (p50854661.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.133.70.97]) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 38F551BBB; Thu, 1 Jul 2021 14:08:40 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE; s=20200306; t=1625141320; bh=qFEsIFDxV5lU/Dnhqqbds+JbTb6G1tJxzJJGb2rU3cE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=DProQz79tH46yARyr0At9m7fA7UN2W0C4Rpom/3usc4Z0MMIrZyKo9Pi3bpngoGUm KhfvPZFz2IYhlEfZEgvzZZFHflbGixI68CoBmznfMuvZBvcvq1byOb+NikEJ/C8Pm/ yjjPpD4tXe0IVym6XzAPDUF+K2/lCfjQyzMiMgJ/Ec0tHJQ9wJbhH9X27WCJ+hp6TY /pS2RpMVp6QM1EE08AKbGOXTQwBhoiIHT+IZUmnygwN26dUB9vJplM90BrxSYWzk++ uh1bzU1bPyH5VrXgyeCFEPlU85ZJD2IYbXg50os2OpCTitsHOObcNtaO5f+a1hqgBQ D64S5WELOEeVA== From: Rainer Orth To: Luis Machado via Gdb Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposal for hosting GDB CI builds References: <7bfae273-3887-30c8-dc65-94d5b177db56@linaro.org> <585368bc-4365-d8de-cc40-9bb2dcae94e6@foss.st.com> Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:08:39 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Luis Machado via Gdb's message of "Thu, 1 Jul 2021 08:50:07 -0300") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3787.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2021 12:08:43 -0000 Hi Luis, >> From the reports you shared above, it seems there are lots of tests >> with "random" results (or rather lots of differences between two >> runs). My fear is that reports will soon get ignored if there are too >> many false regressions. But I hope that making such variations public >> will help fix the root cause. > > Unfortunately that's always been the nature of GDB's testsuite. It has > improved over the year, but there are still problematic tests. We will > certainly have to put those into an exception list when reporting the > summaries, at least at an initial stage. on the Solaris side, things are considerably worse: there are currently 2000+ FAILs for a GDB testsuite run, with considerable variation between reruns. I've never got a grip on what's going on, unfortunately, and in the end turned the Solaris GDB buildbots to be build-only so I'd at least catch build failures early. Rainer -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University