-
Couldn't load subscription status.
- Fork 13.9k
Migrate issue-37839, track-path-dep-info and track-pgo-dep-info run-make tests to rmake
#127378
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
4aee83b to
ba1539c
Compare
|
The run-make-support library was changed cc @jieyouxu This PR modifies cc @jieyouxu |
|
@bors delegate+ (for try jobs) |
|
✌️ @Oneirical, you can now approve this pull request! If @jieyouxu told you to " |
|
@bors try |
Migrate `issue-37839`, `track-path-dep-info` and `track-pgo-dep-info` `run-make` tests to rmake Part of rust-lang#121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html). Please try: try-job: test-various try-job: dist-x86_64-musl
|
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
|
Record: passed on |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good, just one question about cross-compile case.
| // Merge the profiles | ||
| run("main"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Question: does this need //@ ignore-cross-compile? Or is that kinda implied by //@ needs-profiler-support (even if it is, maybe having the ignore is clearer?)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe that it's indeed getting implied by //@ needs-profiler-support (you can see the ignored, ignored when profiler support is disabled in the test log), but I added the ignore + reason for clarity. @rustbot review
|
@rustbot author |
ba1539c to
7c23872
Compare
|
Thanks! @bors r+ rollup=iffy (profdata shenanigans) |
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (99b7134): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. CyclesResults (primary 2.8%, secondary -5.1%)This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 705.089s -> 702.448s (-0.37%) |
Part of #121876 and the associated Google Summer of Code project.
Please try:
try-job: test-various
try-job: dist-x86_64-musl