Re: Regressions getting more common

Kamil Rytarowski <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gdb.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Luis,

I talked to Sergio and his ex-boss from Red Hat as I proposed to
maintain the CI infrastructure on behalf of my new company - Moritz
Systems (www.moritz.systems).

Unfortunately RH currently cannot rearrange the budgets, but how about
Linaro? We could spare a dedicated developer full-time or part-time to
monitor the reports and maintain the infrastructure.

We are experienced in maintaining CI infrastructure for years in the BSD
distribution development is a heavy CI workflow (multiple CPUs, multiple
tests, emulators, real machines etc).

Can we discuss it further?

Best regards,

Kamil Rytarowski
CTO, Moritz Systems
www.moritz.systems

On 13.10.2020 19:05, Luis Machado via Gdb wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I don't know about other non-x86 architectures, but over the past year
> I've been noticing more and more regressions being introduced,
> unnoticed, for ARM/AArch64. This is not good and causes a lot of pain if
> you have to keep tracking things manually, like we do now.
> 
> The buildbots worked great for this very purpose, but Sergio has moved
> on to other duties (thanks for all the work!) and can't maintain it
> anymore. The builders are still there though, sitting mostly idle.
> We have a beefy ARM/AArch64 builder, which I can maintain for others to
> use.
> 
> We can do better than to declare things OK after a single round of tests
> under x86, which has been the trend unfortunately.
> 
> The subject of better CI has come up multiple times on IRC, with sad
> memories of the gerrit experiment's demise. Now we're left with review
> by e-mail and no broad testing.
> 
> I think we need to discuss better validation pre-commit and possible CI
> solutions for GDB. It is pretty easy to exercise x86, but it doesn't
> sound fair to other architectures to have to keep cleaning up after
> things that have only been validated on that architecture.
> 
> It would be great to establish a roadmap so we can get GDB's testing to
> today's standards, and maybe revisit the use of more modern patch review
> tools while at it.
> 
> What do you think?
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=nZvN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.