[PATCH 12/20] gitlab: Use -w flag for all builds

[Tom Rini]

On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 09:07:54AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> 
> On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 at 07:03, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 09:10:07PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > Hi Tom,
> > >
> > > On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 at 11:58, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 08:07:26PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > Avoid needing to know about the internal .bm-work directory, by passing
> > > > > the -w flag to buildman.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also drop the repeated call to buildman since the first one should show
> > > > > all the expected output. We only need to use -s if we are building
> > > > > multiple boards and want the errors to be coalesced. In this case we are
> > > > > only building a single board.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > >  .gitlab-ci.yml | 9 ++++-----
> > > > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/.gitlab-ci.yml b/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > > > > index b29d59d942..bbd05aa872 100644
> > > > > --- a/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > > > > +++ b/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > > > > @@ -29,11 +29,11 @@ stages:
> > > > >    script:
> > > > >      # From buildman, exit code 129 means warnings only.  If we've been asked to
> > > > >      # use clang only do one configuration.
> > > > > +    - export UBOOT_TRAVIS_BUILD_DIR=/tmp/${TEST_PY_BD}
> > > > >      - ret=0;
> > > > > -      tools/buildman/buildman -o /tmp -P -E --board ${TEST_PY_BD} ${OVERRIDE}
> > > > > -        || ret=$?;
> > > > > +      tools/buildman/buildman -o ${UBOOT_TRAVIS_BUILD_DIR} -w -E
> > > > > +        --board ${TEST_PY_BD} ${OVERRIDE} || ret=$?;
> > > > >        if [[ $ret -ne 0 && $ret -ne 129 ]]; then
> > > > > -        tools/buildman/buildman -o /tmp -seP --board ${TEST_PY_BD};
> > > > >          exit $ret;
> > > > >        fi
> > > >
> > > > The repeated call is so that when we have a CI error from buildman the
> > > > error is at the bottom of the output and we don't have to hunt for it,
> > > > so I'm not sure this is a developer-friendly change.
> > >
> > > I don't quite get this, since the two buildman calls are one after the
> > > other. What difference do you see in the output?
> >
> > Instead of having the errors be throughout the page we see something
> > like:
> > arch: +BOARD1 BOARD2
> > +(BOARD1,BOARD2) error..
> >
> > At the bottom of the page.  So you open the failed build link, hit "End"
> > and there's where to find what to fix.
> 
> Yes I see. But in this case we are only building a single board so
> there should be no difference.
> 
> BTW it looks like we are not using the -l flag for the 'multiple
> build' case, so we shouldn't see the (BOARD1,BOARD2) thing.

Perhaps this is a good example of why I'm asking for the commit message
to be clearer about the tests being changed :)  But isn't this also the
same build area as the general builds?

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20200315/c03855e0/attachment.sig>