New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 619569 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Duplicate
Merged: issue 586967
Owner:
Closed: Jun 2016
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: Windows
Pri: 1
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

Windows builders fail flakily running ninja with -d explain at the end of compile step

Project Member Reported by olka@chromium.org, Jun 13 2016

Issue description

https://build.chromium.org/p/chromium.webrtc.fyi/builders/Win%20x64%20GN%20%28dbg%29/builds/5778

Per kjellander@:
It's a flake during the end of the compile step. It's the second time I've seen this in a short while and https://build.chromium.org/p/chromium.webrtc.fyi/builders/Win%20x64%20GN%20%28dbg%29?numbuilds=200 shows many similar failures. 
 
Components: Infra>Goma
Labels: OS-Windows Pri-1 Type-Bug-Regression
Summary: Windows builders fail at end of compile step (goma related?) (was: buildbot failure in Chromium WebRTC FYI on Win x64 GN (dbg))
Log snippet for convenience:

[12/12] STAMP obj/chromium_builder_tests.stamp
ninja explain: restat of output chrome.7z older than most recent input ../Debug_x64/views_content_client.dll (0 vs 487528152)
ninja explain: chrome.7z is dirty
ninja explain: setup.ex_ is dirty
ninja explain: gen/chrome/installer/mini_installer/packed_files.rc is dirty
ninja explain: obj/chrome/installer/mini_installer/archive.stamp is dirty
ninja explain: gen/chrome/installer/mini_installer/packed_files.rc is dirty
ninja explain: obj/chrome/installer/mini_installer/mini_installer/packed_files.res is dirty
ninja explain: mini_installer.exe is dirty
ninja explain: obj/chrome/installer/mini_installer/archive.stamp is dirty
ninja explain: mini_installer.exe is dirty
ninja explain: obj/chrome/installer/mini_installer/next_version_mini_installer.inputdeps.stamp is dirty
ninja explain: next_version_mini_installer.exe is dirty
ninja explain: obj/chrome/installer/mini_installer/next_version_mini_installer.stamp is dirty
ninja explain: obj/both_gn_and_gyp.stamp is dirty
ninja explain: obj/gn_all.stamp is dirty
ninja explain: obj/All.stamp is dirty
ninja explain: obj/chromium_builder_tests.stamp is dirty
<Thread(Thread-1, started 5596)> ProcessRead: proc.stdout finished.
<Thread(Thread-1, started 5596)> ProcessRead: cleaning up.
<Thread(Thread-2, started daemon 6584)> TimedFlush: Finished
<Thread(Thread-1, started 5596)> ProcessRead: finished.
Failing build because ninja reported work to do.
This means that after completing a compile, another was run and
it resulted in still having work to do (that is, a no-op build
wasn't a no-op). Consult the first "ninja explain:" line for a
likely culprit.


Labels: -Infra-Troopers
This is fyi; does this need trooper attention? This looks like more of a goma outage, so I'm removing the trooper label. 
I don't know. I just thought a trooper might be more familiar with what's going on at the end of the compile step. I'm fine leaving this for the Goma folks to chime in on.
Components: -Infra>Goma
Labels: -Restrict-View-Google
Owner: scottmg@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
Summary: Windows builders fail flakily running ninja with -d explain at the end of compile step (was: Windows builders fail at end of compile step (goma related?))
I looked into this and it's related to the second compile invocation (passing -d explain to ninja) that's supposed to verify that running a second compile is a no-op.
Here's the code involved: https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/build/scripts/slave/compile.py?rcl=0&l=660

The odd thing is that our dbg bot gets this failing so often while the Chromium bot with exactly the same config is rock solid:
https://build.chromium.org/p/chromium.win/builders/Win%20x64%20Builder%20%28dbg%29?numbuilds=200

scottmg: since you seem to have added this feature, is this something you can help us debug?

Mergedinto: 586967
Status: Duplicate (was: Assigned)
I think this is being looked into in  bug 586967 .

Sign in to add a comment