Arm binutils buildbot workers

[Christophe Lyon]

On 7/19/22 23:29, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi Christophe,
> 
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 06:39:42PM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> I've just tried to use the configure/make options I found in master.cfg for
>> binutils_factory_target_all:
>> configure --enable-gold --enable-shared --enable-targets=all
>> make all-gas all-ld all-binutils all-gold
>> make check-gas check-ld check-binutils
>>
>> which completes on both 32 and 64 bit systems (aarch64 and armhf).
>> There are some FAILs in the results, though, but no problem with sim. I
>> think it is a problem with gdb only?
> 
> OK great. I guess it is not a problem for just building
> binutils/gas/ld because that doesn't drag in sim. But when building
> gdb it might also build sim?
Exactly.


>>> Could it be both? The idea behind to user try branches is that you can
>>> run the buildbot builders as if doing a "real" build. There are not
>>> many people using the try branches at the moment, so it isn't really
>>> that much more work (also the configuration is simply adding an
>>> identifical builder to the try-scheduler).
>>>
>> Sure. IIUC, it's just a matter of an additional *_try_*_builder entry in
>> master.cfg, and they can share the same worker?
> 
> Yes. The try-builder get triggered by a different schedule (one that
> listens to the git users/hacker/try- branches). But uses the same
> buildfactory and the same worker as the normal builder.
Nice.

> The worker can also be the same as the workers now used for gdb. So
> you don't need to create new containers unless you want to.
OK, so for instance, I could re-start the existing containers, giving 
them more CPUs (say 8), keep ncpus/maxcpus to 4 in the workers 
definitions, but increase max_builds to 2, so that for instance we can 
run binutils and gdb jobs on the same worker at the same time?

Do binutils and gdb cohabit well when it comes to testing them in 
parallel?  I guess it should be the case, but in practice gdb has proven 
to have many tests with random results :-(


> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Mark