Skip to content

Conversation

@andyleiserson
Copy link
Contributor

Stumbling on #3164 this morning reminded me that these tests weren't being run in CI.

Testing
Adds already passing tests to CI so they don't regress.

Squash or Rebase? Squash

- name: run CTS
- name: Test cts_runner
shell: bash
run: cargo --locked xtask test --llvm-cov -p cts_runner
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think it's particularly interesting or useful for these to contribute to coverage, but it seems like building with --llvm-cov maximizes build reuse between this and the next step.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Never mind, --llvm-cov doesn't get along with deno.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also, I don't think we actually share artifacts between xtask and the workspace?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why wouldn't they be shared?

I actually think my original concern about needing llvm-cov for build reuse wasn't accurate, the compilation of the dependencies appears to be mostly reused anyways, I guess because they aren't instrumented for coverage.

The CTS job doesn't currently install cargo-nextest. In one of the intermediate versions of the job, I added it, but the current version doesn't have it, and doesn't use the test xtask. I could add it back if it seemed like consistency amongst our test jobs is that important.

There are only 3 tests in cts_runner, so there's not a lot at stake here.

@andyleiserson andyleiserson force-pushed the push-vlvkyspznpnv branch 2 times, most recently from 8a26612 to 9e38f97 Compare November 18, 2025 23:47
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.

2 participants