disable linux64/windows7/windows10 opt builds and tests on mozilla-inbound and autoland branches
Categories
(Testing :: General, defect, P3)
Tracking
(firefox67 fixed)
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox67 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: jmaher, Assigned: Callek)
References
Details
Attachments
(8 files, 1 obsolete file)
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
Details | |
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
Details | |
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
Details | |
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
Details | |
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
Details | |
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
Details | |
(deleted),
text/x-github-pull-request
|
emorley
:
checked-in+
|
Details |
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
Details |
there is a small bit of work to do in order to make this completed:
- adjust taskcluster to only do opt for l64/w7/w10 on mozilla-central and try and mark it as tier-2
- fix SETA to take existing 'opt' jobs we would run and run those as 'pgo'
I am not sure if we need to have any adjustments to |./mach try|. I would like to push artifact builds to be pgo, but that is unrelated.
I also do not see any differentiation in manifests between opt and pgo, only debug or not debug for test skipping or expectations.
:ahal, can you think of other pieces to fix in order to make this a reality?
Updated•6 years ago
|
Updated•6 years ago
|
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•6 years ago
|
||
before doing this officially we should track some data:
- total hours (per day, per push) in total for all branches
- total jobs (per day, per push) in total for all branches
- total intermittents (per day) in total for all branches
ideally we can look at 2 weeks before/after the change to have a good data point of what we are saving. This is good to advertise as a result of doing this, likewise this is useful for predicting what we might see for any changes in the future (more job deletion or addition)
:catlee, are these metrics useful? do we have this data available from your point of view?
Comment 2•6 years ago
|
||
++ for tracking. I suggest a shorter window -- at most 7 days before and after -- to reduce the effects of other factors.
Comment 3•6 years ago
|
||
No, I can't think of anything else. There won't be any changes to make in |mach try|, though I guess I could de-emphasize 'opt' in the |mach try chooser| UI. As I haven't advertised that much, I don't think it's a big deal (currently it is responsible for 2% of pushes).
Comment 4•6 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Joel Maher ( :jmaher ) (UTC-4) from comment #1)
before doing this officially we should track some data:
- total hours (per day, per push) in total for all branches
- total jobs (per day, per push) in total for all branches
- total intermittents (per day) in total for all branches
ideally we can look at 2 weeks before/after the change to have a good data point of what we are saving. This is good to advertise as a result of doing this, likewise this is useful for predicting what we might see for any changes in the future (more job deletion or addition)
:catlee, are these metrics useful? do we have this data available from your point of view?
We have data for 1) and 2) available for specific branches, I'm not sure if we track that data across all branches. We don't track 3) currently, but I think you have a better handle on intermittents than I do :)
Simon/Nick any thoughts on this?
Comment 5•6 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Chris AtLee [:catlee] from comment #4)
(In reply to Joel Maher ( :jmaher ) (UTC-4) from comment #1)
before doing this officially we should track some data:
- total hours (per day, per push) in total for all branches
- total jobs (per day, per push) in total for all branches
Is a job a task, or a group of tasks to do a particular CI run/build/release?
We have data for 1) and 2) available for specific branches, I'm not sure if we track that data across all branches. We don't track 3) currently, but I think you have a better handle on intermittents than I do :)
Simon/Nick any thoughts on this?
We can also go into recent history for 1 and 2, to populate a new data source. Where would people best like to visualise the information?
Reporter | ||
Comment 6•6 years ago
|
||
disable opt builds when pgo exists for autoland/inbound and adjust seta to run those opt jobs on pgo.
Reporter | ||
Comment 8•6 years ago
|
||
I landed this and opt builds are still running on autoland :(
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=autoland&revision=8d7c099bbe0dbb73c8b9eb3a356ffad3cdd0e723
:tomprince, do you have ideas of how this could be made to not run the opt builds on autoland/inbound?
Comment 9•6 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
Updated•6 years ago
|
Comment 10•6 years ago
|
||
The problem is that some tests are configured to run on autoland/inbound, and they depend on the builds, which force the builds to run.
I made an attempt to solve this for linux64: https://gist.github.com/catlee/0adc285e7a56eb0405c7d32e33a8a0a3
It appears to work according to mach taskgraph target -p project=autoland
, but I'm not sure if it's correct for other branches.
Comment 11•6 years ago
|
||
It looks like the builds are getting pulled into the graph by various dependencies:
(generated via mach taskgraph target-graph --fast -p project=autoland -J | jq '.[]|select([.["dependencies"]|.[]]|contains(["build-signing-linux64/opt"]))|.label'
)
- "l10n-linux64/opt"
- "source-test-jsshell-bench-ares6-sm"
- "source-test-jsshell-bench-octane-sm"
- "source-test-jsshell-bench-sixspeed-sm"
- "source-test-jsshell-bench-sunspider-sm"
- "source-test-jsshell-bench-web-tooling-sm"
- "source-test-python-mochitest-harness-linux64/opt"
- "source-test-python-reftest-harness-linux64/opt"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-chrome-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-damp-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-dromaeojs-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-g1-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-g3-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-g4-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-g5-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-other-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-perf-reftest-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-perf-reftest-singletons-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-svgr-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-tp5o-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-tp6-stylo-threads-e10s"
- "test-linux64-qr/opt-talos-tps-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-browser-screenshots-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-bcv-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-chrome-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-damp-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-dromaeojs-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-g1-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-g3-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-g4-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-g5-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-other-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-perf-reftest-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-perf-reftest-singletons-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-svgr-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-tp5o-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-tp6-stylo-threads-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-talos-tps-e10s"
- "test-linux64/opt-test-verify-e10s-1"
- "test-linux64/opt-test-verify-e10s-2"
- "test-linux64/opt-test-verify-e10s-3"
- "test-linux64/opt-test-verify-gpu-e10s-1"
- "test-linux64/opt-test-verify-gpu-e10s-2"
- "test-linux64/opt-test-verify-gpu-e10s-3"
- "test-linux64/opt-test-verify-wpt-e10s-1"
- "test-linux64/opt-test-verify-wpt-e10s-2"
- "test-linux64/opt-test-verify-wpt-e10s-3"
(and presumably similarly for other platforms)
Reporter | ||
Comment 12•6 years ago
|
||
:gbrown, I will not get to work on this bug this week, if you have cycles, I think what :catlee and :tomprince added will do the trick. I know you suggested an interest in this.
We need to keep in mind that mozilla-beta runs opt builds but it is labeled opt when it is really pgo.
Comment 13•6 years ago
|
||
I'll see what I can do...
Comment 14•6 years ago
|
||
:jmaher I think this disabled Raptor tests on Quantum Render platforms (QR seem to only run on opt builds).
I noticed this thing by verifying this alert.
Reporter | ||
Comment 15•6 years ago
|
||
good point :igoldan, I see that clearly when looking at a before/after:
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=mozilla-inbound&searchStr=raptor&tochange=63348118ef1d564a659f793c0ec9afe5d7f1cc8b&fromchange=d8cebb3b46cfd216ab60e58588e585f28750a5f3
Luckily we are still running on mozilla-central, but I think possibly we should back this out until we get a patch that does the right thing.
To that point, I see we do not run *-qr-pgo tests- should we be doing that? Lets see what :kats says
Reporter | ||
Comment 16•6 years ago
|
||
and it appears that this patch broke SETA because in the hack to move opt jobs to pgo, we never returned the new label which caused SETA to do nothing for the last week (hence the backlog and tree closures) - thanks Aryx for catching this.
Comment 17•6 years ago
|
||
This got backed out because it broke SETA optimization and the full set of jobs ran for every push on autoland and inbound:
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/22ca3a5f976fd0f11c96cd3f5d6b91e55fb9b06d
Updated•6 years ago
|
Comment 18•6 years ago
|
||
If we're turning off opt, then yeah we should move the QR tests to the pgo build instead. Let me know if you need me to write a patch for any part of that.
Assignee | ||
Comment 19•6 years ago
|
||
Depends on D18104
Updated•6 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 20•6 years ago
|
||
Depends on D19742
Assignee | ||
Comment 21•6 years ago
|
||
This avoids opt being pulled in even when l10n is optimized out
Depends on D19838
Updated•6 years ago
|
Comment 22•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 23•6 years ago
|
||
Comment 24•6 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 25•6 years ago
|
||
adjust manifest for webrender tests that are now passing/failing as a result of running on PGO
Comment 26•6 years ago
|
||
Backed out 5 changesets (Bug 1522111) for breaking windows opt wpts
Backout push: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/6a145b0bf8e4a9e1a227b2327f6fbbbe948fbae8
Assignee | ||
Comment 27•6 years ago
|
||
Comment 28•6 years ago
|
||
Comment 29•6 years ago
|
||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Comment 30•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 31•6 years ago
|
||
Comment 32•6 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/4d3c12d6fd14
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/85456690910d
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/96f074966007
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/176bccfac2c7
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/d3e2e32d61ea
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/e2c779112d08
Comment 33•6 years ago
|
||
Comment 34•6 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
Updated•6 years ago
|
Updated•6 years ago
|
Updated•6 years ago
|
Updated•6 years ago
|
Updated•6 years ago
|
Updated•6 years ago
|
Description
•