-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.5k
Update LLVM submodule #143126
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
Update LLVM submodule #143126
Conversation
I'm currently unable to access my Mac. @bors2 try jobs=x86_apple*,aarch64-apple |
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Add a regression test for ld64 We might want a test case. r? ghost try-job: x86_apple* try-job: aarch64-apple
// This is a regression test for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/140686. | ||
// Although this is a ld64(ld-classic) bug, we still need to support it | ||
// due to cross-compilation and support for older Xcode. |
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: do we know if ld-classic
will ever be removed in newer Xcode versions?
(EDIT: actually probably nevermind, we'll then either drop this test and/or need to bump our min baseline versions anyway.)
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.
Nobody knows. Even after removing it, we might still need a long time to get rid of the test. :(
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.
Perhaps we could wait for new updates from Apple first, such as a fix for the ld64 bug, or the release of new linker source code.
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.
Oh for the test I'm not too worried even if somehow say a macos image bumps the xcode version and then this test blocks full CI, in that situation this test can be disabled or removed easily.
I was just musing if ld-classic might be gone.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Add a regression test for ld64 We might want a test case. r? ghost try-job: x86_64-apple* try-job: aarch64-apple
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Add a regression test for ld64 We might want a test case. r? ghost try-job: x86_64-apple* try-job: aarch64-apple
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Add a regression test for ld64 We might want a test case. r? ghost try-job: x86_64-apple*
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
@bors2 try jobs=x86_64-apple-2 |
Add a regression test for ld64 We might want a test case. r? ghost try-job: x86_64-apple-2
💔 Test failed
|
r? nikic |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
🟩 |
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
@bors r+ rollup=never |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
What is this?This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.Comparing 5adb489 (parent) -> 75d5834 (this PR) Test differencesShow 5 test diffsStage 1
Stage 2
Additionally, 1 doctest diff were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy. Job group index
Test dashboardRun cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
test-dashboard 75d5834a6c571cb0455acb5128ad51118fcbf2be --output-dir test-dashboard And then open Job duration changes
How to interpret the job duration changes?Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance |
Finished benchmarking commit (75d5834): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - BENCHMARK(S) FAILED@rustbot label: -perf-regression ❗ ❗ ❗ ❗ ❗
❗ ❗ ❗ ❗ ❗ cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary -1.3%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 460.95s -> 162.322s (-64.79%) |
Hmm, I wonder what happened here. Some CI jobs were much slower, but that's expected, as they now had to build LLVM. But there were also a few test changes, which is a bit weird, not sure if that's just an artifact of us building LLVM on CI. And the bootstrap benchmark has also time-outed. I wonder if it was unable to use download-ci-llvm for some reason 🤔 Sadly we don't currently log its output, I'll change that. We'll see what happens in the benchmark of the next master merge. |
@Kobzol The compressed-debuginfo-zstd test change always happens on LLVM updates due to a difference in configuration between CI LLVM (has zstd) and that test runner (doesn't have zstd). |
Fixes #140686, fixes #141913, fixes #142752, fixes #143399.