Skip to content

Conversation

jyn514
Copy link
Member

@jyn514 jyn514 commented Mar 30, 2023

They pass fine, and this avoids having to build the compiler twice.

There are few enough tests left that I think it should be possible to get rid of this test suite altogether, but I expect this PR to fail at least a few times in bors and want to get it merged before tackling further changes. cc #83775

Fixes #66085. Fixes #83773.

@jyn514 jyn514 changed the title Move almost all run-make-fulldeps to run-make Move almost all run-make-fulldeps tests to run-make Mar 30, 2023
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Mar 30, 2023

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

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

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Mar 30, 2023
@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

You may need to add # ignore-cross-compile to some of these if errors about something like missing ARM linker appear.
For run-make-fulldeps tests cross-compilation is not performed.

jyn514 added 3 commits March 30, 2023 07:58
apparently I missed some tests in the last commit. Rather than having
dozens of tests use the long version, use the short version in
`run-make` and the long version in `run-make-fulldeps` (which is now
only three tests)
`run-make-fulldeps` is never cross-compiled, so a lot of these tests
never accounted for --target. Ignore them when cross-compiling for
now.
@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

@bors r+ rollup=iffy

Presuming this passes CI, I think it makes sense - I'm a little surprised we put so many tests in the wrong category, but not that much :)

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 2, 2023

📌 Commit 4851d56 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 Apr 2, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 2, 2023

⌛ Testing commit 4851d56 with merge af86a1d8720c1fcb8184a05eeba5eb8f2f4aea2f...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 2, 2023

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Apr 2, 2023
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Apr 2, 2023
@jyn514 jyn514 force-pushed the run-make-fulldeps branch from 4e5064f to c45037b Compare April 2, 2023 21:55
@jyn514
Copy link
Member Author

jyn514 commented Apr 2, 2023

4e5064f is the only change since the last approval.

@bors r=Mark-Simulacrum rollup=iffy

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 2, 2023

📌 Commit c45037b 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 Apr 2, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 3, 2023

⌛ Testing commit c45037b with merge 3328913...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 3, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Mark-Simulacrum
Pushing 3328913 to master...

1 similar comment
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 3, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Mark-Simulacrum
Pushing 3328913 to master...

@bors bors added merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. labels Apr 3, 2023
@bors bors merged commit 3328913 into rust-lang:master Apr 3, 2023
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.70.0 milestone Apr 3, 2023
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (3328913): 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)
3.6% [3.6%, 3.6%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

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)
4.4% [3.8%, 4.8%] 4
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

@jyn514 jyn514 deleted the run-make-fulldeps branch April 3, 2023 07:24
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 14, 2023
Move most ui-fulldeps tests to ui/

Same rationale as rust-lang#109770, they don't actually need a stage 2 build.

This increases the limit for the UI directory because otherwise it was annoying to be constantly moving files into subdirectories when I fixed a test; rust-lang#109873 makes up for it.

cc rust-lang#109770, rust-lang#109874
RalfJung pushed a commit to RalfJung/miri that referenced this pull request Apr 14, 2023
Move most ui-fulldeps tests to ui/

Same rationale as rust-lang/rust#109770, they don't actually need a stage 2 build.

This increases the limit for the UI directory because otherwise it was annoying to be constantly moving files into subdirectories when I fixed a test; rust-lang/rust#109873 makes up for it.

cc rust-lang/rust#109770, rust-lang/rust#109874
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Jun 9, 2024
…-ozkan

Remove empty test suite `tests/run-make-fulldeps`

After rust-lang#109770, there were only a handful of tests left in the run-make-fulldeps suite.

As of rust-lang#126111, there are no longer *any* run-make-fulldeps tests, so now we can:

- Remove the directory
- Remove related bootstrap/compiletest code
- Remove various other references in CI scripts and documentation.

By removing this suite, we also no longer need to worry about discrepancies between it and ui-fulldeps, and we don't have to worry about porting tests from Makefile to [rmake](rust-lang#121876) (or whether rmake even works with fulldeps).
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jun 9, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#126155 - Zalathar:run-make-fulldeps, r=onur-ozkan

Remove empty test suite `tests/run-make-fulldeps`

After rust-lang#109770, there were only a handful of tests left in the run-make-fulldeps suite.

As of rust-lang#126111, there are no longer *any* run-make-fulldeps tests, so now we can:

- Remove the directory
- Remove related bootstrap/compiletest code
- Remove various other references in CI scripts and documentation.

By removing this suite, we also no longer need to worry about discrepancies between it and ui-fulldeps, and we don't have to worry about porting tests from Makefile to [rmake](rust-lang#121876) (or whether rmake even works with fulldeps).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
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
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Some run-make-fulldeps don't fail if -include fails Were all the run-make tests meant to to be moved to run-make-fulldeps?
7 participants