I appreciate the value of the feature - but it's possible the test
doesn't pull its weight. Is the code that implements the feature
liable to failure/often touched? If it's pretty static/failure is
unlikely, possibly the time and flaky failures aren't worth the value
of possibly catching a low-chance bug.
Another option might be to reduce how often/in which configurations
the test is run - LLVM_ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS presumably only works
for code within LLVM itself, and not test cases - but maybe I'm wrong
there & this parameter could be used (& then the timing bumped up
quite a bit to try to make it much more reliable), or something
similar could be implemented at the lit check level?
Ah, compiler-rt tests use EXPENSIVE_CHECKS to disable certain tests:
./compiler-rt/test/lit.common.configured.in:set_default("expensive_checks",
@LLVM_ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS_PYBOOL@)
./compiler-rt/test/fuzzer/large.test:UNSUPPORTED: expensive_checks
Could you bump the timeouts a fair bit and disable the tests except
under expensive checks?
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 9:31 PM Dan Liew <d...@su-root.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> Unfortunately writing a reliable test is tricky given that the
> functionality we're trying to test involves timing. I would advise
> against disabling the test entirely because it actually tests
> functionality that people use. I'd suggest bumping up the time limits.
> This is what I've done in the past. See
>
> commit 6dfcc78364fa3e8104d6e6634733863eb0bf4be8
> Author: Dan Liew <d...@su-root.co.uk>
> Date: Tue May 22 15:06:29 2018 +0000
>
> [lit] Try to make `shtest-timeout.py` test more reliable by using a
> larger timeout value. This really isn't very good because it will
> still be susceptible to machine performance.
>
> While we are here also fix a bug in validation of
> `maxIndividualTestTime` where previously it wasn't checked if the
> type was an int.
>
> rdar://problem/40221572
>
> llvm-svn: 332987
>
> HTH,
> Dan.
>
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 09:37, David Blaikie <dblai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Ping on this
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 8:27 PM David Blaikie <dblai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The clang-cmake-armv8-lld (linaro-toolchain owners) buildbot is timing
> > > out trying to run some timeout tests (Dan Liew author):
> > >
> > > Pass: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv8-lld/builds/5672
> > > Fail: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv8-lld/builds/5673
> > >
> > > Is there anything we can do to the buildbot? Or the tests? (bump up the
> > > time limits or maybe remove the tests as unreliable?)
_______________________________________________
linaro-toolchain mailing list
linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
