Re: Jenkins-kde-ci: kdbusaddons master kf5-qt5 » Linux, gcc - Build # 11 - Still Unstable!

[Ben Cooksley]

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 5:59 PM, Martin Graesslin <mgraesslin at kde.org> wrote:
> On Saturday, April 23, 2016 8:48:17 PM CEST Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Martin Graesslin <mgraesslin at kde.org>
> wrote:
>> > On Saturday, April 23, 2016 1:09:00 PM CEST Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Daniel Vrátil <dvratil at kde.org> wrote:
>> >> > On Saturday, April 23, 2016 1:44:16 AM CEST Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> >> >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:11 PM, David Faure <faure at kde.org> wrote:
>> >> >> > On Thursday 21 April 2016 14:57:52 no-reply at kde.org wrote:
>> >> >> >> GENERAL INFO
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> BUILD UNSTABLE
>> >> >> >> Build URL:
>> >> >> >> https://build.kde.org/job/kdbusaddons%20master%20kf5-qt5/PLATFORM=L
>> >> >> >> inu
>> >> >> >> x,
>> >> >> >> compiler=gcc/11/>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Wow, ASAN detected a real bug in Qt here.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Fixed in https://codereview.qt-project.org/156728
>> >> >>
>> >> >> As this issue essentially breaks any test on the CI system that
>> >> >> depends on Qt I suggest all developers affected by this indicate this
>> >> >> on the relevant reviews.
>> >> >
>> >> > Hey guys,
>> >>
>> >> Hi David,
>> >>
>> >> > any chance to get this patch into our Qt build on the CI since it has
>> >> > been
>> >> > integrated upstream now? As it affects all tests that interact with
>> >> > DBus
>> >> > it
>> >> > would be nice to resolve this on the CI.
>> >>
>> >> We'll need upstream to update qt5.git (I think that's still required
>> >> for changes to fully flow through) I think.
>> >> We could try to hack the patch in, but then we'll end up having to
>> >> undo that in a few weeks time.
>> >
>> > Could we disable that ASAN check please[1]? I have two of my projects
>> > failing due to the DBus problem and one further failing due to a similar
>> > problem in QQuickStyleItem [2]. It's nice that we find errors, but I
>> > rather not have my tests fail due to errors in Qt.
>>
>> That would just cover up the issue.
>
> Yes it would and that's exactly what I want.
>
> To me the CI is currently producing false positives. It started to break from
> one moment to the other. It costs time to look into why it started to fail. It
> means that till that problem is fixed in Qt I cannot trust the CI system. It
> results in nobody noticing real breakage, because the build is broken anyway.
>
> Then there is the problem of responsibility: I look at the output, I have no
> idea why that thing is broken, I have no idea how to build a minimal example
> which would reproduce it, even less on how to fix it. That's just a really bad
> situation to have a CI which can be trusted.
>
> In summary: I don't want spend time to investigate false positives. If an
> option results in false positives, I think that we should disable it.

Understandable.

>
> Of course Qt should get those bugs fixed, but for that Qt should enable ASAN on
> their CI system. If we get libraries which are free of ASAN problems, then we
> can enable it on our side. But false positives are just bad.

Based on this i'm going to assume Qt is not ASAN compliant, and will
therefore be disabling ASAN for all KDE projects across the entire KDE
CI system in 24 hours unless nobody objects.

Objectors can be expected to place pressure on the appropriate
processes within the Qt Project to:
a) Get the necessary changes flowed through into qt5.git so we can
pick them up (the existing process is painfully slow)
b) Get their CI system to check for ASAN issues.

>
> Cheers
> Martin

Regards,
Ben