Skip to content

Conversation

@KornevNikita
Copy link
Contributor

We're working on setting a validation for sycl-rel branches. This PR introduces a new workflow to run Nightly on sycl-rel-* branches.

GH actions allows to run scheduled workflows only if the workflow is on the default branch. So we have to checkout to the current rel branch for every job.

We're working on setting a validation for sycl-rel branches. This PR
introduces a new workflow to run Nightly on sycl-rel-* branches.

GH actions allows to run scheduled workflows only if the workflow is on
the default branch. So we have to checkout to the current rel branch for
every job.
@KornevNikita KornevNikita marked this pull request as ready for review December 10, 2024 13:55
@KornevNikita KornevNikita requested a review from a team as a code owner December 10, 2024 13:55
extra_lit_opts: ${{ matrix.extra_lit_opts }}
reset_intel_gpu: ${{ matrix.reset_intel_gpu }}
ref: ${{ env.SYCL_REL_BRANCH }}
merge_ref: ''
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

is there any way we can share all of this because it seems really similar to existing code? can we make a reusable workflow or something?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

By "share all of this" do you mean this job or the whole workflow? The code is really similar, but the matrix is a bit different from what we have in the normal Nightly. And it may be modified in the future.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There is a high chance that we will also have different build configurations. For example, if we are going to release binaries from release branch, then we most likely don't want them to be built with assertions.

Even though there is a lot of similarity, I think that it is maybe ok. Going forward, we may have multiple release branches being active at the same time (due to long release schedule two may overlap a bit) and therefore we may have some unique things in this workflow to trigger it in an interesting way

@KornevNikita
Copy link
Contributor Author

KornevNikita commented Dec 12, 2024

@sarnex any other concerns?

@KornevNikita
Copy link
Contributor Author

@intel/llvm-gatekeepers could you please merge this one?

@martygrant martygrant merged commit 09e1d41 into intel:sycl Dec 13, 2024
23 of 24 checks passed
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.

4 participants