git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Cc: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>,
	"Martin Ågren" <martin.agren@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, "Eric Sunshine" <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] doc-diff: don't `cd_to_toplevel`
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 15:49:10 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190207204910.GB28893@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1902071632280.41@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>

On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 04:41:57PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

> > I think this can be limited to the tests that failed, which makes things
> > much faster. I.e., we run the tests at the tip of topic X and see that
> > t1234 fails. We then go back to the fork point and we just need to run
> > t1234 again. If it succeeds, then we blame X for the failure. If it
> > fails, then we consider it a false positive.
> 
> If you mean merge bases by fork points, I wrote an Azure Pipeline to do
> that (so that I could use the cloud as kind of a fast computer), but that
> was still too slow.
> 
> Even when there are even only as much as 12 merge bases to test (which is
> the current number of merge bases between `next` and `pu`), a build takes
> roughly 6 minutes on Windows, and many tests take 1 minute or more to run
> (offenders like t7003 and t7610 take over 400 seconds, i.e. roughly 6
> minutes), we are talking about roughly 1.5h *just* to test the merge
> bases.

I was assuming you're testing individual topics from gitster/git here
(which admittedly is more CPU in total than just the integration
branches, but it at least parallelizes well).

So with that assumption, I was thinking that you'd just look for the
merge-base of HEAD and master, which should give you a single point for
most topics. For inter-twined topics there may be more merge bases, but
I actually think for our purposes here, just testing the most recent one
is probably OK. I.e., we're just trying to have a vague sense of whether
the test failure is due to new commits or old.

I think Junio's suggestion to just pick some common release points would
work OK in practice, too. It's possible that some other topic made it to
master with a breakage, but in most cases, I think these sorts of
failures are often more coarsely-grained (especially if Junio pays
attention to the CI results before merging).

-Peff

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-02-07 20:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-03  8:35 [PATCH] doc-diff: don't `cd_to_toplevel` before calling `usage` Martin Ågren
2019-02-03  9:08 ` Eric Sunshine
2019-02-03  9:11   ` Eric Sunshine
2019-02-03 10:35     ` Martin Ågren
2019-02-03 11:01       ` Eric Sunshine
2019-02-03 11:08         ` [PATCH v2] " Martin Ågren
2019-02-03 23:01           ` Jeff King
2019-02-04 20:50             ` [PATCH v3] doc-diff: don't `cd_to_toplevel` Martin Ågren
2019-02-04 23:34               ` Jeff King
2019-02-05 10:34                 ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-02-05 18:45                   ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-06 12:20                     ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-02-06 17:24                       ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-06 18:55                     ` Jeff King
2019-02-07 15:41                       ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-02-07 17:37                         ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-07 21:34                           ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-02-07 20:49                         ` Jeff King [this message]
2019-02-07 21:42                           ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-02-06 18:49                   ` Jeff King
2019-02-07 14:26                     ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-02-07 20:45                       ` Jeff King
2019-02-07 21:57                         ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-02-08  2:53                           ` Jeff King
2019-02-08  4:34                             ` Jeff King
2019-02-08  0:58                         ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-02-08  2:51                           ` Jeff King

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190207204910.GB28893@sigill.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=martin.agren@gmail.com \
    --cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).