harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stepan Mishura" <stepan.mish...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] freeze for M5.5_Eclipse_TPTP
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2008 05:29:17 GMT
On 4/24/08, Alexei Fedotov <alexei.fedotov@gmail.com> wrote:
> I ran the tests locally and they passed.

So you applied your fix and all these 15 failed tests passed. Correct?

> Though, a number of other
> tests failed, I assumed, due to assertions absent in your release
> build.
>

Hmm, you assumed that tests results for debug and release builds are
different but this also IMHO may mean other regressions in verifier.

BTW, I don't see any regression test in the patch. Does it make sense
to create it and add it to DRLVM reg. test suite?

Thanks,
Stepan.

> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Stepan Mishura
> <stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 4/24/08, Alexei Fedotov <alexei.fedotov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Stenan,
> >  > Sorry. I have fixed VTS verifier test failures:
> >  > http://people.apache.org/~smishura/r650380/Windows_x86/vtsvm/junit/index.html
> >  >
> >
> >  So all 15 tests failed because of this bug. Correct?
> >
> >  -Stepan.
> >
> >
> >
> >  > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 6:57 AM, Stepan Mishura
> >  > <stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
> >  > > Hi Alexei,
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > >  On 4/24/08, Alexei Fedotov <alexei.fedotov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >  > >  > Hello Stepan,
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > I have fixed more verifier failures, see
> >  > >
> >  > >  Which failures did you fix? HARMONY-5785 description doesn't mention
any.
> >  > >
> >  > >  -Stepan.
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > >  > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-5785
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > Thanks!
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 7:28 AM, Stepan Mishura
> >  > >  > <stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
> >  > >  > > On 4/22/08, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
> >  > >  > >  > Alexei Fedotov wrote:
> >  > >  > >  > > As far as I understand Eclipse IP committee needs
a revision number to
> >  > >  > >  > > be supplied (no binaries involved).
> >  > >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > Apologies, I missed that point in the discussions around
compiler level etc.
> >  > >  > >  >  If it is simply a well-defined revision of the verifier
code then that is
> >  > >  > >  > quite different.
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > > The favour Vasily is asking about
> >  > >  > >  > > is providing him with a slightly tested revision.
This would suppress
> >  > >  > >  > > a normal work of committers for one day. Is it
something we cannot
> >  > >  > >  > > afford?
> >  > >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > Of course, in that area of the code I think it is quite
reasonable.  It
> >  > >  > >  > would not prevent people working in the other areas
of Harmony (such as GC,
> >  > >  > >  > JIT, and class library).
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  OK, freezing only verifier code can be a compromise in this
case.
> >  > >  > >  But I think it makes sense for other areas to ask people
not commit
> >  > >  > >  risky changes (i.e. make feature freeze and commit only bug
fixes) -
> >  > >  > >  it will help with detection and resolution of possible verifier
> >  > >  > >  regressions. I believe that this acceptable too.
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  Could I ask all folks interesting in M5.5_Eclipse_TPTP release
to look
> >  > >  > >  through tests failures to understand if there are regressions
in the
> >  > >  > >  verifier or not?
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  Tests results for r650380 are almost ready [1] (testing the
next
> >  > >  > >  r650564 snapshot will be launched in 2-3 hours).  If there
are no
> >  > >  > >  regressions then I think r650380 (or r650564) can be promoted
as
> >  > >  > >  M5.5_Eclipse_TPTP. If you find verifier regression please
let
> >  > >  > >  everybody know ASAP - it should be fixed quickly.
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  [1] http://people.apache.org/~mloenko/snapshot_testing/script/r650380/index.html
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  Thanks,
> >  > >  > >  Stepan.
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  > Of course, we cannot prevent the revision number of
the entire repository
> >  > >  > >  > changing over time, but you could nominate a givne revision
number for the
> >  > >  > >  > verifier code to be taken by Eclipse.
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > Did I understand this right?
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > Thanks,
> >  > >  > >  > Tim
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
> >  > >  > >  > wrote:
> >  > >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  > > > I'm really not convinced this is a good idea
for Harmony, and my
> >  > >  > >  > concerns
> >  > >  > >  > > > are in two parts:
> >  > >  > >  > > >
> >  > >  > >  > > >  1) Our schedule should not be dictated by
an external project,
> >  > >  > >  > especially
> >  > >  > >  > > > when it is their process that seems to be
setting the artificial time
> >  > >  > >  > limit.
> >  > >  > >  > > > Why not show some flexibility to meet our
dates?
> >  > >  > >  > > >
> >  > >  > >  > > >  2) Our principle delivery mechanism is source
code.  While we make
> >  > >  > >  > binaries
> >  > >  > >  > > > available as a convenience we should not encourage
dependents to put
> >  > >  > >  > > > dependencies on our build tools.  They should
take source and compile it
> >  > >  > >  > > > themselves for their own environment.
> >  > >  > >  > > >
> >  > >  > >  > > >  Regards,
> >  > >  > >  > > >  Tim
> >  > >  > >  > > >
> >  > >  > >  > > >  Vasily Levchenko wrote:
> >  > >  > >  > > >
> >  > >  > >  > > >
> >  > >  > >  > > > > $subj.
> >  > >  > >  > > > >
> >  > >  > >  > > > >
> >  > >  > >  > > > >
> >  > >  > >  > > >
> >  > >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > --
> >  > >  > With best regards,
> >  > >  > Alexei
> >  > >  >
> >  > >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > --
> >  > With best regards,
> >  > Alexei
> >  >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> With best regards,
> Alexei
>

Mime
View raw message