On 2015/02/25 21:04:38, michael_dawson wrote:
On 2015/02/25 07:41:25, Sven Panne wrote:
> On 2015/02/24 22:33:45, michael_dawson wrote:
> > In terms of turning on the build bots and getting test coverage would
> > this be in simulated PPC mode ?
>
> As a first step, yes. I don't know what the plans are for bots with
real PPC
HW,
> but even if/when we have such bots, the PPC simulator bots would still
stay,
> otherwise the simulator itself would definitely bit-rot.
>
> > I've been running in the simulated
> > mode to validate the commits accepted so far and the tests pass
> > other than a number of timeouts. (we also run in native mode in
> > our internal testing were results are btter) If so, would the
> > first step be to create a review that brings the ppc directories
> > up to date based on changes in the common code since our last update
> > along with disabling the tests which timeout ? I see that there are
> > excludes for timeouts in simulated mode on other platforms, although
> > the number I see in the PPC simulated runs is higher so this would
> > just be a first step.
>
> That's perfectly fine. Having a relatively high number of tests marked
as
SLOW
> and/or TIMEOUT for a new platform is the usual way to get a port
working. Of
> course this number should be reduced over time, but that's in the hands
of
> people caring about the platform port.
>
> > For us, getting the performance opts in are important, otherwise we
have
to
> > maintain the deltas in our repo, but I can see how getting the build
bots
> > and test coverage enabled is a good step.
>
> So what needs to be done? The steps I see so far are:
>
> * Reduce this CL at hand to the kBootCodeSizeMultiplier change and
land
it
> (that's harmless for the rest of the system and non-controversial).
>
> * Remove any use of V8_OOL_CONSTANT_POOL from your code and even from
your
> "internal deltas".
>
> * Remove the PPC platform-dependent hack in serialize.cc, perhaps by
adding
a
> new RelocInfo::Mode.
>
> * Any other changes you still need to get things running and
integrated.
Are
> there any?
What I've been looking at today is the tests which timeout. I upped the
timeout
to 120s and the number dropped from 38 to 13 so I'm seeing what 180s does.
I'm
assuming its better to give the tests a bit more time to complete so that
we
get
better coverage. It takes a while to run the full suite in simulated
mode to
it
will take me a little while to find the right combination of larger
timeout/test
exclusions.
Create https://codereview.chromium.org/965823002/ to get us more current
and to
remove used of V8_OOL_CONSTANT_POOL
https://codereview.chromium.org/882263003/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to v8-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
