Skip to content

Fix CI for unrolled builds on the try-perf branch #141634

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
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 27, 2025
Merged

Fix CI for unrolled builds on the try-perf branch #141634

merged 1 commit into from
May 27, 2025

Conversation

Kobzol
Copy link
Member

@Kobzol Kobzol commented May 27, 2025 •
edited
Loading

That branch is essentially the same as the try branch, it also needs S3 permissions. While at it, I cleaned up secret loading a bit.

Long term, we should move rollup unrolling from rustc-perf to bors, so that we can have only a single try branch.

The AWS Terraform configuration will also have to be changed to provide the secrets (the bors environment) also for the try-perf branch.

r? @marcoieni

@Kobzol
Fix CI for unrolled builds on the try-perf branch
7fae5ef 
That branch is essentially the same as the `try` branch, it also needs S3 permissions.

Long term, we should move rollup unrolling from rustc-perf to bors, so that we can have only a single try branch.
@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label May 27, 2025
@Kobzol Kobzol mentioned this pull request May 27, 2025
Closed
32 tasks
@pietroalbini
Copy link
Member

@bors r+ p=10

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 27, 2025

📌 Commit 7fae5ef has been approved by pietroalbini

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 May 27, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 27, 2025

⌛ Testing commit 7fae5ef with merge 0fc6f16...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 27, 2025

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: pietroalbini
Pushing 0fc6f16 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label May 27, 2025
@bors bors merged commit 0fc6f16 into rust-lang:master May 27, 2025
8 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.89.0 milestone May 27, 2025
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

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 d76fe15 (parent) -> 0fc6f16 (this PR)

Test differences

No test diffs found

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 0fc6f1672bdde8163164f10e46d2d9ffcaeb2161 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

  1. dist-aarch64-linux: 6108.9s -> 7782.0s (27.4%)
  2. aarch64-apple: 4205.4s -> 5044.7s (20.0%)
  3. aarch64-gnu-debug: 4019.4s -> 4626.9s (15.1%)
  4. x86_64-apple-1: 6457.1s -> 7349.1s (13.8%)
  5. x86_64-apple-2: 5610.8s -> 4855.1s (-13.5%)
  6. dist-x86_64-mingw: 8775.6s -> 7922.9s (-9.7%)
  7. dist-x86_64-apple: 8787.0s -> 9419.9s (7.2%)
  8. dist-x86_64-msvc-alt: 7847.3s -> 7334.5s (-6.5%)
  9. x86_64-gnu-llvm-19-2: 6344.5s -> 5959.1s (-6.1%)
  10. dist-x86_64-netbsd: 5319.4s -> 5040.1s (-5.3%)
How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

@Kobzol Kobzol deleted the try-perf branch May 27, 2025 12:35
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (0fc6f16): 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 (secondary 1.7%)

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)		 2.5% [1.4%, 7.1%] 14
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -4.0% [-5.6%, -2.5%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

Results (secondary -3.7%)

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)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -3.7% [-4.4%, -2.3%] 10
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 779.351s -> 780.158s (0.10%)
Artifact size: 366.34 MiB -> 366.33 MiB (-0.00%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@marcoieni marcoieni

Labels
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.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
1.89.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@Kobzol @pietroalbini @bors @rust-timer @marcoieni @rustbot