Re: CI scripts

Jan Vrany via Gdb
2023-01-18T16:00:58Z

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 Builder)
> > > 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/build.sh
> > >
> >
> > Perfect, thanks a lot! I managed to setup a job on my CI. I just call your
> > script to build GDB and run and process test.
> >
> > There's one little thing - the script uses `--with-guile=guile-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/#mceb9a4e339cd209f7b6d8d361ac5b4523d71635c
>
> 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 failures
as well. Once fixed, it should get back to normal for me too.

Thanks!

Jan