From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 60491 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2018 20:26:10 -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 60469 invoked by uid 89); 5 Dec 2018 20:26:08 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=disabling, elapsed, you! 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 ESMTP; Wed, 05 Dec 2018 20:26:07 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE5C2308FBB1; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 20:26:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unused-10-15-17-196.yyz.redhat.com [10.15.17.196]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EA111974C; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 20:26:05 +0000 (UTC) From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: Pedro Franco de Carvalho Cc: GDB Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement timestamp'ed output on "make check" References: <87va47ojas.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <87a7ljdaax.fsf@redhat.com> <87sgzbohzb.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2018 20:26:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <87sgzbohzb.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (Pedro Franco de Carvalho's message of "Wed, 05 Dec 2018 18:07:20 -0200") Message-ID: <87efavbu02.fsf@redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-12/txt/msg00065.txt.bz2 On Wednesday, December 05 2018, Pedro Franco de Carvalho wrote: > Sergio Durigan Junior writes: > >> From my recollection, ISTR that the gdbserver builders were *very* slow >> even before this commit. I was even talking to Edjunior about disabling >> the gdbserver builders, because they were just contributing to making >> the queue larger for the native builder. > > It seems they were taking about one hour before, at least on the LE > builders, although I think the BE ones were taking longer. Is one hour > more than expected for the gdbserver builders? If not, I'll see if I > can figure out what's taking long. Hm, on the native builder (CentOS-ppc64le-m64), the builds were taking about 30 minutes. However, on CentOS-ppc64le-native-extended-gdbserver-m64 and CentOS-ppc64le-native-gdbserver-m64, the builds were taking much longer. For example: https://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/builders/CentOS-ppc64le-native-gdbserver-m64/builds/1988 Elapsed 6 hrs, 30 mins, 12 secs https://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/builders/CentOS-ppc64le-native-gdbserver-m64/builds/1997 Elapsed 20 hrs, 52 mins, 15 secs Things get much worse with native-extended: https://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/builders/CentOS-ppc64le-native-extended-gdbserver-m64/builds/1992 Elapsed 37 hrs, 4 mins, 29 secs https://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/builders/CentOS-ppc64le-native-extended-gdbserver-m64/builds/1988 Elapsed 37 hrs, 6 mins, 19 secs Unfortunately they haven't reached the commit which introduces the timestamp feature, so we still don't know exactly where they're hanging. >> Alright. I'll try to cancel the builds up until >> 80e24d09860dbeba7d435b4a4f0990f85dbc084e and see how things go. >> >> Thanks for taking the time to investigate this! > > Thank you! No problem. I've now cancelled the builds; let's see how things go. Cheers, -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/