Closed Bug 1090641 Opened 11 years ago Closed 9 years ago

Enable e10s devtools and reftests for Linux opt

Categories

(Release Engineering :: General, defect)

x86_64
Linux
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(e10s+)

RESOLVED INCOMPLETE
Tracking Status
e10s + ---

People

(Reporter: billm, Unassigned)

References

(Blocks 1 open bug)

Details

Attachments

(1 file)

It seems better to do this in one bug since most of the burden is in testing it as far as I can tell. These tests are already running with e10s enabled on holly. They're pretty close to being green. I want to get this bug going in parallel. This patch makes the necessary changes to buildbot-configs. I haven't tested it since I'm not really sure how. It's pretty similar to other changes in the past though. I don't think we need to change mozharness at all. It already accepts a --e10s option that is passed through to the test runner. And runreftests.py already accepts a --e10s option.
Attachment #8513130 - Flags: review?(armenzg)
Also, I just checked that these are the correct job names for tbpl. I'm assuming treeherder works the same way.
Comment on attachment 8513130 [details] [diff] [review] enable-devtools-reftests Review of attachment 8513130 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- The patch looks good to me. It passes test-masters.sh. billm, I see the devtools and reftest jobs on Holly running orange [1][2] The only one that I see green is the opt crashtests [3] Are we ready to enable on trunk? Asking for nthomas to be sure that there are no issues to add these many more jobs (I think we're fine via test-masters.sh) [1] https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Holly&jobname=devtools [2] https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Holly&jobname=reftest [3] https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Holly&jobname=opt.*crash
Attachment #8513130 - Flags: review?(nthomas)
Attachment #8513130 - Flags: review?(armenzg)
Attachment #8513130 - Flags: review+
Thanks. I'm still waiting for green on holly. Bug 1090627 needs to land and I also need to do a merge. After that I'll do a bunch of retriggers. Once it looks good this will be ready to land.
Comment on attachment 8513130 [details] [diff] [review] enable-devtools-reftests Currently 3783 builders on the linux64 testers, and you're adding 60, so that's fine. I'm curious what the end-game is here. Will we still run e10s and non-e10s flavors of everything once we've enabled e10s by default ?
Attachment #8513130 - Flags: review?(nthomas) → review+
billm, once everything is green and the changes are on m-c for a day or so feel free to land.
The reftest work is taking longer than I expected, but the devtools tests are green. Therefore I landed most of this patch, excepting the parts that enable the reftests: https://hg.mozilla.org/build/buildbot-configs/rev/db9baccc7994 Here are the holly results for the devtools tests that were enabled: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Holly&rev=03b31879e1c7 Hopefully I'll be able to land the reftest stuff next week.
Keywords: leave-open
The latest push to holly was green, so here's the second part: https://hg.mozilla.org/build/buildbot-configs/rev/312dd3f51908
Keywords: leave-open
Why are we enabling permafailing tests in production by default? https://treeherder.mozilla.org/ui/logviewer.html#?job_id=3617639&repo=mozilla-inbound Hidden across all trees.
Flags: needinfo?(wmccloskey)
Also, is there a bug on file for shutting off crashtest-ipc and reftest-ipc once these are green and unhidden?
(In reply to Bill McCloskey (:billm) from comment #10) > The latest push to holly was green, so here's the second part: > https://hg.mozilla.org/build/buildbot-configs/rev/312dd3f51908 We can't enable jobs without landing on m-i first and let it percolate through the various trees for a day or two at least. RyanVM, should we back out for now?
I already hid them anyway. I just wish a bit more consideration was given instead of dumping permafail on trees that are already in bad shape (as Bill knows).
I'm sorry this happened. I still don't understand why these jobs are failing. The push to holly was successful and, to the best of my understanding, we're running the same jobs on inbound as on holly. Either there's some difference in the configuration or else something regressed in between the holly push yesterday and now. Most of the reftests are actually passing, and there aren't any timeouts or crashes, so I think there's still value in running them hidden on every push. I'll try to get this sorted out in the next day or so. I don't think we should consider backing out yet.
Flags: needinfo?(wmccloskey)
It looks like the tests did regress over one day. I pushed to holly again and they're failing there now, while we were passing before. I guess I'll have to bisect.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → INCOMPLETE
Component: General Automation → General
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: