Skip to content

Use llvm-cov show-env for cts_runner integration tests#9401

Open
andyleiserson wants to merge 1 commit intogfx-rs:trunkfrom
andyleiserson:jj-push-yysy
Open

Use llvm-cov show-env for cts_runner integration tests#9401
andyleiserson wants to merge 1 commit intogfx-rs:trunkfrom
andyleiserson:jj-push-yysy

Conversation

@andyleiserson
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@andyleiserson andyleiserson commented Apr 9, 2026

May help with #9402, or it may not, I'm not really sure.

The CTS jobs, as the name suggests, run CTS tests. The "other" CTS jobs additionally run the Rust integration tests for cts_runner. Previously, the xtask used llvm-cov show-env so we can run the binary directly instead of via cargo, which makes the runs much faster. But the integration tests were still using cargo llvm-cov run. The show-env method puts build products in their usual locations in target, while llvm-cov run puts them in something like target/llvm-cov-target.

I have two theories of #9402. The one relevant here is that things are generally unhappy switching between the two build directories, so to try and avoid any problems of that sort, this configures the CTS jobs to consistently use show-env.

(The other theory is that when the GitHub actions cache gets saved from a non-"other" job and then used to run the "other", something gets confused about the incremental build state, resulting in the v8 link error. #9403 addressed this by saving caches only from the "other" CTS jobs. (And also only on trunk, but that part is an unrelated optimization.))

Testing
CI, but it's not clear what the precise conditions are for #9402 to show up.

Squash or Rebase? Squash

@andyleiserson andyleiserson force-pushed the jj-push-yysy branch 2 times, most recently from 6f3d56f to e0129a8 Compare April 10, 2026 18:47
@andyleiserson andyleiserson changed the title Also run cts_runner unit tests with llvm-cov show-env Use llvm-cov show-env for cts_runner integration tests Apr 10, 2026
@andyleiserson andyleiserson force-pushed the jj-push-yysy branch 3 times, most recently from 92f9092 to b542bcf Compare April 10, 2026 22:26
@andyleiserson andyleiserson marked this pull request as ready for review April 10, 2026 23:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant