Thanks for the explanation, Ross. Sounds like it should be mostly
smooth-sailing so I'm happy to give it a try and see how it goes.

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 2:53 PM, 'Ross McIlroy' via v8-dev <
[email protected]> wrote:

> On 11 November 2015 at 18:23, Adam Klein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Ross McIlroy <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Recently we have started running a subset of the mjsunit and test262
>>> tests in the Ignition interpreter on the V8 test bots. In order to keep the
>>> waterfall green, we are going to start running these tests on the commit
>>> queue (CQ) as well (once https://codereview.chromium.org/1440673002/
>>>  lands).
>>>
>>> Since Ignition doesn't support all JavaScript features yet, you may see
>>> CQ failures on these tests for your own CLs if you add a new mjsunit test
>>> or modify V8 such that existing test runs differently.  If you see a
>>> failure for a test in MjsunitIgnition or Test262Ignition, just add a line
>>> to the ignition section of test/mjsunit/mjsunit.status or
>>> test/test262/test262.status to skip the test on ignition, and let me know.
>>>
>>> Please let me know if you have any problems with these tests or the
>>> process of if adding these skips becomes too burdensome.
>>>
>>
>> If the only action when the CQ bots fail is going to be to add lines to
>> the status file, why is this approach more useful than just letting the bot
>> go red on failures (and leave it out of the CQ)?
>>
>
> The problem is it's not an independent bot - for resource reasons it is an
> additional step on all the existing bots, therefore if it goes red, the
> main waterfall goes red (and LKGRs and Chromium rolls stop).
>
>
>> It seems like in either strategy, manual intervention from the Ignition
>> team will be necessary to further-triage the failure, and the plan proposed
>> by Ross is strictly more work.
>>
>
> This shouldn't be much work - I've tried to make sure all ES6 feature
> tests are wildcard blacklisted, so I'm hoping there should be very few
> (hopefully no) situations where any additional test skipping is necessary -
> the tests have been running on the waterfall for a couple of days and,
> other than a few initial flakes which we've now suppressed, have been
> stable.  This PSA is meant as a heads up - I'm not thinking this should
> require any changes to day-to-day business, if it does let me know and we
> can try something else.
>
>
> - Adam
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ross
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> v8-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
>>> ---
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "v8-dev" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> v8-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "v8-dev" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
> --
> --
> v8-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "v8-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
-- 
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to