This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc buildbot?
- From: Christophe Lyon <christophe dot lyon at st dot com>
- To: Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>, Philippe Baril Lecavalier <pbl dot ltx at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "jbglaw at lug-owl dot de" <jbglaw at lug-owl dot de>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:51:48 +0100
- Subject: Re: gcc buildbot?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1401061549520 dot 12012 at zardoz dot site> <8738kwqk0g dot fsf at talisman dot default>
On 01/10/14 10:11, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Hi,
Philippe Baril Lecavalier <pbl.ltx@gmail.com> writes:
I have been experimenting with buildbot lately, and I would be glad to
help in providing it. If there is interest, I could have a prototype and
a detailed proposal ready in a few days. It could serve GCC, binutils
and some important libraries as well.
Thanks for the offer. I think the current state is that Jan-Benedict Glaw
has put together a buildbot for testing that binutils, gcc and gdb
build for a wide range of targets:
http://toolchain.lug-owl.de/buildbot/
which has been very useful for catching target-specific build failures.
AFAIK the bot doesn't (and wasn't supposed to) check for testsuite
regressions, but I could be wrong about that. There was some discussion
about adding testsuite coverage here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-08/msg00317.html
One aspect hasn't been discussed in that thread: I don't think it's possible to run the testsuite for every single commit, since 'make check' takes really a lot of time on some targets.
I have developed a cross-validation environment in which cross-build and cross-validate several ARM and AArch64 combinations. In my case, each build+check job takes about 3h (make -j4, in tmpfs, c, c++ and fortran), and I have to restrict the validation to an "interesting" subset of commits. Running on actual HW would be slower.
But it's definitely worth it :-)
Christophe.