From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32566 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2014 12:45:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 32556 invoked by uid 89); 23 Sep 2014 12:45:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 12:45:36 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s8NCjX23006151 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:45:33 -0400 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-67.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.67]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s8NCjTan030171 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:45:31 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 12:45:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Pedro Alves Cc: Doug Evans , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: automated testing comment [Re: time to workaround libc/13097 in fsf gdb?] Message-ID: <20140923124529.GA21886@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <5412E3AC.80203@redhat.com> <20140912123320.GA8704@host2.jankratochvil.net> <5412EB1F.40309@redhat.com> <20140917201049.GA22880@host2.jankratochvil.net> <541C3FCF.4000400@redhat.com> <541C409E.6010408@redhat.com> <20140920213033.GA6255@host2.jankratochvil.net> <541F2311.1040404@redhat.com> <20140923105855.GA10164@host2.jankratochvil.net> <54216860.7060008@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54216860.7060008@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-09/txt/msg00684.txt.bz2 On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:32:32 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote: > :-) Ah, OK. I thought that that was already the reason you > didn't match the vDSO using AT_SYSINFO_EHDR in your original patch. OK, true, I could make some such patch already in the original patch but I found that part obvious. :-) > > It would be found by automated testing upon submitting patch for reviews, such > > as I have seen done through Jenkins connected to Gerrit. > > Or even after the patch is in, and we can revert if build / test bots > find a problem. Seems like a simpler step that I don't think anyone > would object to ... I find the primary advantage that it tests the patches already before review. The same way the patches are automatically checked for proper code formatting. So one no longer has to lose time on those mechanical parts during reviews, which is one of the reasons I stopped doing them regularly (if I ever did). > Seems like Jan-Benedict Glaw is running a buildbot that includes GDB: > Sergio was also interested in setting up a GDB build bot. > There's the gcc compile farm too. I do not know who is running which bots but so far it seems to me I am the only one paying some attention to their results - or are there other regression bugreports I miss on the list? > We should be able to filter those out though. Of course ideally we'd > just fix them to not be fuzzy... I do not see how to filter them automatically. The gdb.mi/mi-nsintrall.exp regression today looks exactly like one of the many nightly fuzzy results but in the end it has proven to be a real regression. Jan