Chromium Code Reviews
|
|
Chromium Code Reviews
Issue
2617823004:
Up TSAN bot CQ experiment to 50% (Closed)
|
Created:
3 years, 11 months ago by gab Modified:
3 years, 11 months ago Reviewers:
Dirk Pranke CC:
chromium-reviews Target Ref:
refs/pending/heads/master Project:
chromium Visibility:
Public. |
DescriptionUp TSAN bot CQ experiment to 50%
It's been very stable for 24 hours @ 10%:
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_tsan_rel_ng
BUG=672860
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_chromium_tsan_rel_ng
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2617823004
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#444813}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/a0f0a395c1604aadbfe97a5815044fbd245d7a11
Patch Set 1 #
Messages
Total messages: 19 (9 generated)
gab@chromium.org changed reviewers: + dpranke@chromium.org
Dirk PTAL, I assume it's expected that although I can see the bot is automatically triggering on some CLs [1] those CLs don't show the bot in their list in the Reitveld UI, e.g. https://codereview.chromium.org/2554123002? Seems to match linux_chromium_headless_rel, so I'm guessing that any "experiment_percentage" makes the bot trigger but not be required to pass CQ? [1] https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium...
Description was changed from ========== Up TSAN bot CQ experiment to 50% It's been very stable for 24 hours @ 10%: https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium... BUG=672860 ========== to ========== Up TSAN bot CQ experiment to 50% It's been very stable for 24 hours @ 10%: https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium... BUG=672860 CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_chromium_tsan_rel_ng ==========
The CQ bit was checked by gab@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run
Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...
The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org
Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.
Sorry for the delay on this. I expect this CL will be fine, but I want to double-check the capacity numbers first. You are correct that experimental builders don't block the CQ (ever). That's the whole point behind them being experimental.
On 2017/01/09 04:04:34, Dirk Pranke wrote: > Sorry for the delay on this. I expect this CL will be fine, but I want to > double-check the capacity numbers first. Okay thanks, let me know when things are clear. Will we need to add more VMs or does it auto scale? > > You are correct that experimental builders don't block the CQ (ever). That's the > whole point behind them being experimental.
On 2017/01/09 16:32:03, gab wrote: > On 2017/01/09 04:04:34, Dirk Pranke wrote: > > Sorry for the delay on this. I expect this CL will be fine, but I want to > > double-check the capacity numbers first. > > Okay thanks, let me know when things are clear. Will we need to add more VMs or > does it auto scale? That's exactly the question :) The builder is part of the main linux CQ pool, so we probably don't need to add more VMs, but that's what I need to check.
On 2017/01/09 16:34:33, Dirk Pranke wrote: > On 2017/01/09 16:32:03, gab wrote: > > On 2017/01/09 04:04:34, Dirk Pranke wrote: > > > Sorry for the delay on this. I expect this CL will be fine, but I want to > > > double-check the capacity numbers first. > > > > Okay thanks, let me know when things are clear. Will we need to add more VMs > or > > does it auto scale? > > That's exactly the question :) The builder is part of the main linux CQ pool, so > we > probably don't need to add more VMs, but that's what I need to check. Ok http://crrev.com/443720 landed and master was restarted, tests are now actually running : https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium... Are we ready to land this?
On 2017/01/18 19:49:06, gab wrote: > Are we ready to land this? Seems fine to land :).
On 2017/01/18 19:53:26, Dirk Pranke wrote: > On 2017/01/18 19:49:06, gab wrote: > > Are we ready to land this? > > Seems fine to land :). But I'm still lacking your LGTM ;)
Whoops, of course :). lgtm.
The CQ bit was checked by gab@chromium.org
CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...
CQ is committing da patch.
Bot data: {"patchset_id": 1, "attempt_start_ts": 1484852627404480, "parent_rev":
"d377464c5d3b7aaa13823000932c1a23f3c4d01c", "commit_rev":
"a0f0a395c1604aadbfe97a5815044fbd245d7a11"}
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Description was changed from ========== Up TSAN bot CQ experiment to 50% It's been very stable for 24 hours @ 10%: https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium... BUG=672860 CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_chromium_tsan_rel_ng ========== to ========== Up TSAN bot CQ experiment to 50% It's been very stable for 24 hours @ 10%: https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium... BUG=672860 CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_chromium_tsan_rel_ng Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2617823004 Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#444813} Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/a0f0a395c1604aadbfe97a581504... ==========
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/a0f0a395c1604aadbfe97a581504... |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
