The co-development of hardware and software in industrial embedded systems frequently leads to compilation errors during continuous integration (CI). Automated repair of such failures is promising, but existing techniques rely on test cases, which are not available for non-compilable code. We employ an automated repair approach for compilation errors driven by large language models (LLMs). Our study encompasses the collection of more than 40000 commits from the product's source code. We assess the performance of an industrial CI system enhanced by four state-of-the-art LLMs, comparing their outcomes with manual corrections provided by human programmers. LLM-equipped CI systems can resolve up to 63% of the compilation errors in our baseline dataset. Among the fixes associated with successful CI builds, 83% are deemed reasonable. Moreover, LLMs significantly reduce debugging time, with the majority of successful cases completed within 8 minutes, compared to hours typically required for manual debugging.

Industrial embedded systems often require special-ized hardware. However, software engineers have access to such domain-specific hardware only at the continuous integration (CI) stage and have to use simulated hardware otherwise. This results in a higher proportion of compilation errors at the CI stage than in other types of systems, warranting a deeper study. To this end, we create a CI diagnostics solution called 'Shadow Job' that analyzes our industrial CI system. We collected over 40000 builds from 4 projects from the product source code and categorized the compilation errors into 14 error types, showing that the five most common ones comprise 89 % of all compilation errors. Additionally, we analyze the resolution time, size, and distance for each error type, to see if different types of compilation errors are easier to localize or repair than others. Our results show that the resolution time, size, and distance are independent of each other. Our research also provides insights into the human effort required to fix the most common industrial compilation errors. We also identify the most promising directions for future research on fault localization.

Faults in the automated continuous integration (CI) process can seriously impact the development of industrial code. To reduce manual intervention in automated CI processes, we want to understand better the CI systems' failure distribution to improve efficiency, reliability, and maintainability. This paper investigates failures in CI in four large industrial projects. We gather 11 731 builds over six months, identifying 1 414 failing builds. We also identify the distribution of different types of build failures in each of the four CI projects. Our results show that compilation is the most significant individual cause of failure with 47 %, followed by testing at 36 %. The checkout step with associated checks also incurs a non-negligible portion of failures with 12 %. Furthermore, we identify 14 distinct types of failures in the testing step. We conclude that configuration problems are a significant issue, as pipeline scripting and dependency errors make up a large number of failures.

Software bugs are common, and correcting them accounts for a significant portion of the costs in the software development and maintenance process. In this article, we discuss R-Hero, our novel system for learning how to fix bugs based on continual training.