Remove all of the CrOS Ozone configs from MB.

Remove all of the CrOS Ozone configs from MB.

Ozone is now on by default on all CrOS builds, and we don't
need to test the old x11 config any more. This CL flips
all of the CrOS builders to (implicitly) be building for Ozone,
so that we can then remove the explicit Ozone builders in a
follow-up CL.

This builder also removes the
linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng builder from the CQ
since would otherwise be redundant with the
linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng builder.

This CL also removes a couple of commented-out CQ entries for
builders that were removed as part of the work in bug 669297
(linux_chromium_chromeos_compile_dbg_ng and linux_chromium_clobber_rel_ng);
at the time I had planned to re-add them once the capacity
issues were resolved, but at this point it's unclear how
important those configs are and we may want to use the
capacity for other things, and so these comments were misleading.

R=kylechar@chromium.org, kbr@chromium.org
TBR=achuith@chromium.org, xdai@chromium.org
BUG=671355
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#485495}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/7385c63ec2b3606a67bb192bf96311ada07aa1c6

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-06-22 02:19:26]

Description was changed from

==========
Remove all of the CrOS Ozone configs from MB.

Ozone is now on by default on all CrOS builds, and we don't
need to test the old x11 config any more. This CL flips
all of the CrOS builders to (implicitly) be building for Ozone,
so that we can then remove the explicit Ozone builders in a
follow-up CL.

This builder also removes the
linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng builder from the CQ
since would otherwise be redundant with the
linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng builder.

This CL also removes a couple of commented-out CQ entries for
builders that were removed as part of the work in bug 669297
(linux_chromium_chromeos_compile_dbg_ng and linux_chromium_clobber_rel_ng);
at the time I had planned to re-add them once the capacity
issues were resolved, but at this point it's unclear how
important those configs are and we may want to use the
capacity for other things, and so these comments were misleading.

R=kylechar@chromium.org
BUG=671355
==========

to

==========
Remove all of the CrOS Ozone configs from MB.

Ozone is now on by default on all CrOS builds, and we don't
need to test the old x11 config any more. This CL flips
all of the CrOS builders to (implicitly) be building for Ozone,
so that we can then remove the explicit Ozone builders in a
follow-up CL.

This builder also removes the
linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng builder from the CQ
since would otherwise be redundant with the
linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng builder.

This CL also removes a couple of commented-out CQ entries for
builders that were removed as part of the work in bug 669297
(linux_chromium_chromeos_compile_dbg_ng and linux_chromium_clobber_rel_ng);
at the time I had planned to re-add them once the capacity
issues were resolved, but at this point it's unclear how
important those configs are and we may want to use the
capacity for other things, and so these comments were misleading.

R=kylechar@chromium.org, kbr@chromium.org
BUG=671355
==========

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-06-22 02:19:27]

dpranke@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ kbr@chromium.org

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-06-22 02:19:53]

@kylechar - the bulk of the review is for you.

@kbr - can you double-check the GPU changes (and FYI)?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004/diff/1/tools/mb/mb_config.pyl
File tools/mb/mb_config.pyl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004/diff/1/tools/mb/mb_config.pyl#newc...
tools/mb/mb_config.pyl:1231: 'gpu_fyi_tests', 'release_trybot', 'chromeos',
'system_gbm_libdrm',
@kbr - you still need the gbm and libdrm flags, I'm guessing?

[kylechar, 2017-06-22 13:06:56]

lgtm with nit.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004/diff/1/tools/mb/mb_config.pyl
File tools/mb/mb_config.pyl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004/diff/1/tools/mb/mb_config.pyl#newc...
tools/mb/mb_config.pyl:1395: 'ozone_linux_release_trybot': [
nit: fix alphabetical order here?

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-06-22 15:11:24]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004/diff/1/tools/mb/mb_config.pyl
File tools/mb/mb_config.pyl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004/diff/1/tools/mb/mb_config.pyl#newc...
tools/mb/mb_config.pyl:1395: 'ozone_linux_release_trybot': [
On 2017/06/22 13:06:56, kylechar wrote:
> nit: fix alphabetical order here?

Sure; I left it where it was to make the review easier, but I can re-sort it
now.

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-06-22 23:29:20]

The CQ bit was checked by dpranke@chromium.org

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-06-22 23:29:21]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
kylechar@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004/#ps20001
(title: "sort configs")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-22 23:29:42]

CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[Ken Russell (switch to Gerrit), 2017-06-23 00:02:18]

kbr@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ fjhenigman@chromium.org

[Ken Russell (switch to Gerrit), 2017-06-23 00:02:19]

fjhenigman@ set up the CrOS bots on the chromium.gpu.fyi waterfall and should be
given a heads up. Yes, we want the CrOS tester bot on that waterfall running gbm
and libdrm and not X11.

I think this is OK to land - lgtm - but please sync up with Frank tomorrow.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004/diff/20001/tools/mb/mb_config.pyl
File tools/mb/mb_config.pyl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004/diff/20001/tools/mb/mb_config.pyl#...
tools/mb/mb_config.pyl:259: 'Linux ChromiumOS Builder':
'gpu_fyi_tests_chromeos_release_trybot',
It looks like this is now redundant. fjhenigman@ should be notified and it
should be removed.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-23 02:40:04]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-23 02:40:05]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[kylechar, 2017-07-07 20:34:40]

One more thing I just realized, there are more tests in "Linux ChromiumOS Ozone
Tests (1)" than "Linux ChromiumOS Tests (1)". We don't want to lose test
coverage, so maybe this CL should also move all tests that are in the first into
the second (it's mostly overlap)?

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-07-07 20:35:17]

On 2017/07/07 20:34:40, kylechar wrote:
> One more thing I just realized, there are more tests in "Linux ChromiumOS
Ozone
> Tests (1)" than "Linux ChromiumOS Tests (1)". We don't want to lose test
> coverage, so maybe this CL should also move all tests that are in the first
into
> the second (it's mostly overlap)?

Yup, I'll try to make sure we don't lose anything.

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-07-11 00:55:01]

The CQ bit was checked by dpranke@chromium.org

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-07-11 00:55:01]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from kbr@chromium.org,
kylechar@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004/#ps130001
(title: "rebase")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-07-11 00:55:25]

CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-07-11 01:06:19]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-07-11 01:06:20]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  chromium_presubmit on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromium_presub...)

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-07-11 01:16:17]

Description was changed from

==========
Remove all of the CrOS Ozone configs from MB.

Ozone is now on by default on all CrOS builds, and we don't
need to test the old x11 config any more. This CL flips
all of the CrOS builders to (implicitly) be building for Ozone,
so that we can then remove the explicit Ozone builders in a
follow-up CL.

This builder also removes the
linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng builder from the CQ
since would otherwise be redundant with the
linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng builder.

This CL also removes a couple of commented-out CQ entries for
builders that were removed as part of the work in bug 669297
(linux_chromium_chromeos_compile_dbg_ng and linux_chromium_clobber_rel_ng);
at the time I had planned to re-add them once the capacity
issues were resolved, but at this point it's unclear how
important those configs are and we may want to use the
capacity for other things, and so these comments were misleading.

R=kylechar@chromium.org, kbr@chromium.org
BUG=671355
==========

to

==========
Remove all of the CrOS Ozone configs from MB.

Ozone is now on by default on all CrOS builds, and we don't
need to test the old x11 config any more. This CL flips
all of the CrOS builders to (implicitly) be building for Ozone,
so that we can then remove the explicit Ozone builders in a
follow-up CL.

This builder also removes the
linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng builder from the CQ
since would otherwise be redundant with the
linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng builder.

This CL also removes a couple of commented-out CQ entries for
builders that were removed as part of the work in bug 669297
(linux_chromium_chromeos_compile_dbg_ng and linux_chromium_clobber_rel_ng);
at the time I had planned to re-add them once the capacity
issues were resolved, but at this point it's unclear how
important those configs are and we may want to use the
capacity for other things, and so these comments were misleading.

R=kylechar@chromium.org, kbr@chromium.org
TBR=achuith@chromium.org, xdai@chromium.org
BUG=671355
==========

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-07-11 01:16:22]

The CQ bit was checked by dpranke@chromium.org

[Dirk Pranke, 2017-07-11 01:16:40]

TBR'ing achuith@ and xdai@ for the browsertest fix.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-07-11 01:16:43]

CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-07-11 02:15:32]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 130001, "attempt_start_ts": 1499735782907290,
"parent_rev": "0e41fe8632d60a94200666e5eae0660bfdcd33e9", "commit_rev":
"7385c63ec2b3606a67bb192bf96311ada07aa1c6"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-07-11 02:15:43]

Description was changed from

==========
Remove all of the CrOS Ozone configs from MB.

Ozone is now on by default on all CrOS builds, and we don't
need to test the old x11 config any more. This CL flips
all of the CrOS builders to (implicitly) be building for Ozone,
so that we can then remove the explicit Ozone builders in a
follow-up CL.

This builder also removes the
linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng builder from the CQ
since would otherwise be redundant with the
linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng builder.

This CL also removes a couple of commented-out CQ entries for
builders that were removed as part of the work in bug 669297
(linux_chromium_chromeos_compile_dbg_ng and linux_chromium_clobber_rel_ng);
at the time I had planned to re-add them once the capacity
issues were resolved, but at this point it's unclear how
important those configs are and we may want to use the
capacity for other things, and so these comments were misleading.

R=kylechar@chromium.org, kbr@chromium.org
TBR=achuith@chromium.org, xdai@chromium.org
BUG=671355
==========

to

==========
Remove all of the CrOS Ozone configs from MB.

Ozone is now on by default on all CrOS builds, and we don't
need to test the old x11 config any more. This CL flips
all of the CrOS builders to (implicitly) be building for Ozone,
so that we can then remove the explicit Ozone builders in a
follow-up CL.

This builder also removes the
linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng builder from the CQ
since would otherwise be redundant with the
linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng builder.

This CL also removes a couple of commented-out CQ entries for
builders that were removed as part of the work in bug 669297
(linux_chromium_chromeos_compile_dbg_ng and linux_chromium_clobber_rel_ng);
at the time I had planned to re-add them once the capacity
issues were resolved, but at this point it's unclear how
important those configs are and we may want to use the
capacity for other things, and so these comments were misleading.

R=kylechar@chromium.org, kbr@chromium.org
TBR=achuith@chromium.org, xdai@chromium.org
BUG=671355

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2949093004
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#485495}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/7385c63ec2b3606a67bb192bf963...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-07-11 02:15:45]

Committed patchset #8 (id:130001) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/7385c63ec2b3606a67bb192bf963...

[keishi, 2017-07-11 10:33:54]

A revert of this CL (patchset #8 id:130001) has been created in
https://codereview.chromium.org/2974923002/ by keishi@chromium.org.

The reason for reverting is: ash_unittests are failing on ChromeOS AsanLsan bot
crbug.com/740859
Regression range is 485493 - 485513 so suspecting this..