Seems that it was fixed earlier today. Thanks, Yvan
On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 at 19:31, Yvan Roux <yvan.r...@linaro.org> wrote: > > Hi Sam, > > It took a very long time to identify it, but this commit broke ARMv7 > bots, where this test hangs. Logs are available here (initial ones > are too old): > > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv7-quick/builds/3685/steps/ninja%20check%201/logs/stdiohttp://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv7-quick/builds/3685/steps/ninja%20check%201/logs/stdio > > Thanks, > YvanOn Thu, 30 Aug 2018 at 17:15, Sam McCall via Phabricator via > cfe-commits <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > sammccall added inline comments. > > > > > > ================ > > Comment at: clangd/TUScheduler.cpp:474 > > + llvm::unique_function<void(std::shared_ptr<const PreambleData>)> > > Callback) { > > + if (RunSync) > > + return Callback(getPossiblyStalePreamble()); > > ---------------- > > ilya-biryukov wrote: > > > It seems we could remove the special-casing of `RunSync` and still get > > > correct results (the Requests queue is always empty). > > > But feel free to keep it for clarity. > > Right, of course :-) > > Replaced this with an assert before we write to the queue. > > > > > > ================ > > Comment at: clangd/TUScheduler.h:123 > > + /// Controls whether preamble reads wait for the preamble to be > > up-to-date. > > + enum PreambleConsistency { > > + /// The preamble is generated from the current version of the file. > > ---------------- > > ilya-biryukov wrote: > > > Maybe use a strongly-typed enum outside the class? > > > `TUScheduler::Stale` will turn into `PreambleConsistency::Stale` at the > > > call-site. The main upside is that it does not pollute completions inside > > > the class with enumerators. > > > > > > Just a suggestion, feel free to ignore. > > Yeah, the downside to that is that it *does* pollute the clangd:: > > namespace. So both are a bit sad. > > > > This header is fairly widely visible (since it's included by clangdserver) > > and this API is fairly narrowly interesting, so as far as completion goes I > > think I prefer it being hidden in TUScheduler. > > > > > > Repository: > > rL LLVM > > > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D51438 > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > cfe-commits mailing list > > cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org > > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
