Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Add ARM to CI #1509

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 5, 2021
Merged

Add ARM to CI #1509

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions eng/pipelines/runtimelab.yml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -98,6 +98,7 @@ stages:
platforms:
- Linux_x64
- Linux_musl_x64
- Linux_arm
- Linux_arm64
- windows_x64
- windows_arm64
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion eng/pipelines/runtimelab/runtimelab-post-build-steps.yml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ parameters:
uploadIntermediateArtifacts: false

steps:
- ${{ if ne(parameters.archType, 'arm64') }}:
- ${{ if and(ne(parameters.archType, 'arm'), ne(parameters.archType, 'arm64')) }}:
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If I use eq(parameters.archType, 'x64') would this cover Linux_musl_x64? Even if not, maybe better be explicit about arches where tests runs?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ideally, the tests would run everywhere and this condition would not be needed. This looks good to me as is.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reason why I'm asking about that is that CI has financial and hardware limitations which may not be resolved as easy as technical one. Somebody has to approve bill to allocate hardware for ARM64 for example. And given that I see FreeBSD and s390x brewing, and RISK-V in distant future too, I do not see that this would be added to hardware pool so easy, given that even ARM64 not running tests by default.

Again, that's just a question which do not have practical application for me.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

runtimelab repo is low-traffic and CI does not cost much currently (dotnet/runtimelab costs <1% of what dotnet/runtime costs). The CI costs for runtimelab are not a concern at this point.

ARM64 not running tests by default.

The reason behind this is that it is a non-trivial amount of work to get the ARM/ARM64 tests running for native AOT in the CI (we would want the tests to be cross-compiled on x64, just like the regular ARM/ARM64 build is cross-compiled). If you get the setup figure out, it would be fine to get the tests enabled on ARM/ARM64.


- ${{ if eq(parameters.buildConfig, 'Release') }}:
- script: $(Build.SourcesDirectory)/build$(scriptExt) libs.tests -c Release
Expand Down