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

Don't ask for a specific branch in cargotest #118597

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 4, 2023
Merged

Don't ask for a specific branch in cargotest #118597

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 4, 2023

Conversation

lnicola
Copy link
Member

@lnicola lnicola commented Dec 4, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Tentative fix for #118592 (comment).

servo just renamed their master branch to main, but cargotest does a git fetch $URL master; git reset --hard $SHA. Let's try to change that to git fetch $URL $SHA; git reset --hard $SHA, which appears to work, but I can't confirm for sure because I'm having some trouble with x.py:

 --> library/rustc-std-workspace-core/lib.rs:4:9
  |
4 | pub use core::*;
  |         ^^^^
  |
  = note: the following crate versions were found:
          crate `core` compiled by rustc 1.76.0-nightly (85a4bd8f5 2023-12-04): ./build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage1-std/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/release/deps/libcore-70719e8645e6f000.rmeta
  = help: please recompile that crate using this compiler (rustc 1.76.0-nightly (5808b7248 2023-12-04)) (consider running `cargo clean` first)

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Dec 4, 2023

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Dec 4, 2023
This was referenced Dec 4, 2023
Merged
Merged
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

@bors treeclosed=10

@bors p=11

closing tree until this is fixed

looks reasonable to me, but idk anything about this code so i will not r+

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

compiler-errors commented Dec 4, 2023 •
edited
Loading

pls update/flesh out description :)

@lnicola
Copy link
Member Author

lnicola commented Dec 4, 2023

Done, thank you.

onur-ozkan
onur-ozkan reviewed Dec 4, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Removing hard-coded branch name seems good to me. However, you still need to bump the commit sha of servo as it no longer exists.

Copied from CI logs

Initialized empty Git repository in /checkout/obj/build/ct/servo/.git/
fatal: Could not parse object '785a344e32db58d4e631fd3cae17fd1f29a721ab'.
fatal: couldn't find remote ref master

@lnicola
Copy link
Member Author

lnicola commented Dec 4, 2023 •
edited
Loading

No, the commit exists:

commit 785a344e32db58d4e631fd3cae17fd1f29a721ab (HEAD -> master)
Author: Anthony Ramine <[email protected]>
Date:   Wed Oct 16 14:07:39 2019 +0200

    Update rand to 0.7 (fixes #24448)

(also at https://github.com/servo/servo/tree/785a344e32db58d4e631fd3cae17fd1f29a721ab)

It's master that no longer does. I don't understand why it ends up showing that error.

@onur-ozkan
Copy link
Member

No, the commit exists:

commit 785a344e32db58d4e631fd3cae17fd1f29a721ab (HEAD -> master)
Author: Anthony Ramine <[email protected]>
Date:   Wed Oct 16 14:07:39 2019 +0200

    Update rand to 0.7 (fixes #24448)

(also at https://github.com/servo/servo/tree/785a344e32db58d4e631fd3cae17fd1f29a721ab)

It's master that no longer does. I don't understand why it ends up showing that error.

I get it now. From the following code we try to do hard-reset to specific commit hash, and in the initial iteration we haven't fetched the servo yet. This results in the mentioned error.

I don't know why fn clone_repo had to be that complicated.

This was referenced Dec 4, 2023
Merged
Merged
@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

@bors r+ p=10

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 4, 2023

📌 Commit 5808b72 has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Dec 4, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 4, 2023

⌛ Testing commit 5808b72 with merge 0a83e43...

This was referenced Dec 4, 2023
Merged
Merged
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

@bors treeclosed-

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 4, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Mark-Simulacrum
Pushing 0a83e43 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Dec 4, 2023
@bors bors merged commit 0a83e43 into rust-lang:master Dec 4, 2023
12 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.76.0 milestone Dec 4, 2023
@lnicola lnicola deleted the cargotest-no-branch branch December 4, 2023 14:46
@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum mentioned this pull request Dec 4, 2023
Merged
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (0a83e43): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 3.3% [3.3%, 3.3%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -2.7% [-2.7%, -2.7%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 673.967s -> 673.138s (-0.12%)
Artifact size: 314.12 MiB -> 314.10 MiB (-0.01%)

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2023
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#118607 - Mark-Simulacrum:stable-next, r=Mark-…
a28077b 
…Simulacrum

[stable] 1.74.1 release

This includes backports of:

*  Dispose llvm::TargetMachines prior to llvm::Context being disposed rust-lang#118464
*  clarify fn discriminant guarantees: only free lifetimes may get erased rust-lang#118006
*  Move subtyper below reveal_all and change reveal_all rust-lang#116415
   *  Make subtyping explicit in MIR rust-lang#115025 (needed for above)

As well as infrastructure fix:

*  Don't ask for a specific branch in cargotest rust-lang#118597

r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
@cuviper cuviper mentioned this pull request Dec 12, 2023
Merged
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 13, 2023
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#118837 - cuviper:beta-next, r=cuviper
4bd9c37 
[beta] Update backtrace submodule

*  Update backtrace submodule rust-lang#118137

As well as infrastructure fix:

*  Don't ask for a specific branch in cargotest rust-lang#118597

r? ghost
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan onur-ozkan approved these changes

Assignees

@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum

Labels
A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
1.76.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@lnicola @rustbot @compiler-errors @onur-ozkan @Mark-Simulacrum @bors @rust-timer