-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 63
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
Fix up the aws-lc-verification and blst-verification CI runs #2199
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
d179a6a
Set IN_SAW_CI=yes for the aws-lc and blst verification runs.
sauclovian-g b3cf031
Update the aws-lc-verification and blst-verification commit hashes.
sauclovian-g 8f2d3b6
Bump the CI's cabal cache version since it looks like it's gotten hosed.
sauclovian-g File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
I would suggest using the CI_TEST_LEVEL variable that we use in other repos for consistency. It has apparently not been set yet in the CI configuration for saw or cryptol, but it is used in numerous other repositories (e.g. https://github.com/GaloisInc/crucible/blob/master/.github/workflows/crux-llvm-build.yml#L62 and https://github.com/GaloisInc/what4/blob/038e948817b092ac7750e073f1d430ee293f3c20/.github/workflows/test.yml#L61).
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.
So the reason I didn't do that, or the reason not to do that, or something, is that it should be a variable that's specific to SAW (and, ideally, these particular test runs) and that one isn't. In particular using it for this purpose would prevent using it in either of the other trees' CI logic.
...and given that one of the blst-verification CI jobs seems to run for >6 hours, if that tree ever comes back to life they probably should use it. :-|