ci: add `ignore-wasm` to failing wasm tests #7537

lblack00 · 2025-08-16T01:07:10Z

Addresses failing wasm tests: #7519

Motivation

Currently, the MSRV is pinned temporarily and there is a large amount of failures for wasm doctests with the Rust 1.89.0 release.

Solution

Add ignore-wasm to failing doctests until these tests pass with the new release.

ADD-SP · 2025-08-16T02:15:27Z

Please also revert #7518 .

lblack00 · 2025-08-16T03:38:08Z

These annotations are only for a small section of the failing wasm tests, which yields:
test result: FAILED. 93 passed; 265 failed; 20 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 3.91s

I plan on opening PRs for the remaining sections to it split up based on module, unless it is preferred to aggregate all annotations here

mox692 · 2025-08-16T05:57:35Z

@lblack00

Thank you for the PR!

I plan on opening PRs for the remaining sections to it split up based on module, unless it is preferred to aggregate all annotations here

I think we would want to have 1 PR (1 commit), instead of having multiple commits of this. Having some large file changes for this is fine with me.

Also, as @ADD-SP mention, we can revert #7518 in this PR.

lblack00 · 2025-08-16T08:22:36Z

Test results yield:
test result: ok. 93 passed; 0 failed; 285 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 1.59s

mox692 · 2025-08-21T12:17:09Z

Now the doc test is hitting compile_error! here:

tokio/tokio/src/lib.rs

Lines 463 to 475 in 925c614

    
           #[cfg(all( 
        
               not(tokio_unstable), 
        
               target_family = "wasm", 
        
               any( 
        
                   feature = "fs", 
        
                   feature = "io-std", 
        
                   feature = "net", 
        
                   feature = "process", 
        
                   feature = "rt-multi-thread", 
        
                   feature = "signal" 
        
               ) 
        
           ))] 
        
           compile_error!("Only features sync,macros,io-util,rt,time are supported on wasm.");

(it looks like cargo test --lib wouldn't hit this cfg, but cargo test --doc does.)

You could update the cfgs in the ci settings like this:

- cargo test -p tokio --target ${{ matrix.target }} --features full
+ cargo test -p tokio --target ${{ matrix.target }} --features "sync,macros,io-util,rt,time"

.github/workflows/ci.yml

mox692

Looks good to me.

ADD-SP

See #7537 (comment), It might be a cargo issue, we'd better having a minimal reproducible example, otherwise, it is hard for me to say that I know what I am doing.

ADD-SP · 2025-08-27T15:11:15Z

I made an minimal reproducible example, it seems unrelated to neither Rust version nor wasm. If I understand correctly, since there is a not(my_unstable), the compile_error! should never fire.

@mox692 Do you have any idea? It look like a Cargo issue.

[package]
name = "feature-flag"
version = "0.1.0"
edition = "2024"

[dependencies]

[features]
epoll = []

[lints.rust]
unexpected_cfgs = { level = "warn", check-cfg = ['cfg(my_unstable)'] }

// src/lib.rs
#[cfg(all(
    not(my_unstable),
    any(
        feature = "epoll",
    )
))]
compile_error!("blablabla");

# no error
RUSTFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" cargo +1.88 test --lib --features epoll
RUSTFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" cargo +1.89 test --lib --features epoll

# compilation error
RUSTFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" cargo +1.88 test --doc --features epoll
RUSTFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" cargo +1.89 test --doc --features epoll

mox692 · 2025-08-27T17:24:27Z

Not sure. It looks like cfg isn't passed to cargo properly. It's probably worth filing an issue on cargo side?

lblack00 · 2025-08-27T19:08:04Z

@ADD-SP This does not trigger compile_fail! on minimal example:

# no error on --doc
RUSTFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" RUSTDOCFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" cargo +1.88 test --doc --features epoll
RUSTFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" RUSTDOCFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" cargo +1.89 test --doc --features epoll

# no error on --lib
RUSTFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" cargo +1.88 test --lib --features epoll
RUSTFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" cargo +1.89 test --lib --features epoll

If we run cargo +1.88 test --doc --features epoll with only RUSTFLAGS or RUSTDOCFLAGS, then compile_fail! is triggered:

RUSTDOCFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" cargo +1.88 test --doc --features epoll

   Compiling foo v0.1.0 (/.../foo)
error: blablabla
 --> src/lib.rs:8:1
  |
8 | compile_error!("blablabla");
  | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

error: could not compile `foo` (lib) due to 1 previous error

RUSTFLAGS="--cfg my_unstable" cargo +1.88 test --doc --features epoll

    Finished `test` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.19s
   Doc-tests foo
error: blablabla
 --> src/lib.rs:8:1
  |
8 | compile_error!("blablabla");
  | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

error: aborting due to 1 previous error

error: doctest failed, to rerun pass `--doc`

I believe this boils down to how running cargo test --doc compiles a crate using rustc and rustdoc, where RUSTFLAGS are passed to rustc and RUSTDOCFLAGS are passed to rustdoc. Even if there are no doctests, running the minimal example without RUSTDOCFLAGS will fail as rustdoc compiles in a separate context than rustc and --cfg=my_stable isn't passed to rustdoc.

tokio-stream/src/empty.rs

…ock_on`

ADD-SP

I think there are several tests don't need to be ignore-wasm, we could enable it.

By the way, and not a blocker, I think its ok to remove the async fn main in the rendered docs.

/// # /*
/// #[tokio::main]
/// # */
/// # #[tokio::main(flavor = "current_thread")]
/// async fn main() {
///     let mut none = stream::empty::<i32>();
///
///     assert_eq!(None, none.next().await);
/// }
///

So we can do this, and it looks less confusing while reading the tokio source.

/// # #[tokio::main(flavor = "current_thread")]
/// async fn main() {
/// let mut none = stream::empty::<i32>();
///
/// assert_eq!(None, none.next().await);
/// # }
///

tokio-util/src/codec/length_delimited.rs

tokio-util/src/codec/mod.rs

tokio-util/src/either.rs

tokio-util/src/io/read_arc.rs

tokio-util/src/io/read_buf.rs

tokio-util/src/io/reader_stream.rs

ADD-SP · 2025-09-04T13:48:37Z

tokio-util/src/io/sync_bridge.rs

@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ use tokio::io::{
 /// incrementally. This avoids blocking and improves performance over using
 /// `SyncIoBridge`.
 ///
-/// ```rust
+/// ```rust,ignore-wasm


Could we enable this test?

I initially couldn't get this test to be enabled until I lowered the memory allocated in the test from 64KiB to 16KiB, specifically for the threads runner.

I tried using futures::executor::block_on and adjusting the max memory limit of the test in RUSTFLAGS but neither seemed to work. Neither did simply adjusting the flavor to current_thread.

Not sure what the deeper problem is there. Except maybe it's just due to the single-threaded execution?

lblack00 · 2025-09-05T18:01:15Z

I removed async fn main from rendered docs except for two instances that I thought came down to either sacrificing some syntactic confusion or readability for docs. Let me know if these aren't appropriate.

tokio/tokio-stream/src/stream_ext.rs

Lines 515 to 518 in 58f199e

    
               /// # /* 
        
               /// #[tokio::main] 
        
               /// # */ 
        
               /// # #[tokio::main(flavor = "current_thread")]

tokio/tokio-util/src/io/sync_bridge.rs

Lines 107 to 110 in 58f199e

    
           /// # /* 
        
           /// #[tokio::main] 
        
           /// # */ 
        
           /// # #[tokio::main(flavor = "current_thread")]

ADD-SP

I think there are still some doc tests should not be disabled on wasm, this is still not a exhausted list, you might find more by scanning this PR.

I use this screenshot to illustrate my concerns.

I rendered the docs of tokio::task using this PR. Using too many exclamation marks in docs can make it a less enjoyable read for downstream.

ADD-SP · 2025-09-06T02:42:30Z

tokio-util/src/io/sync_bridge.rs

+/// # /*
 /// #[tokio::main]
+/// # */


left-over code?

No, I left a #7537 (comment). If you look at this particular test, I don't think it's as clear cut as rendering out async fn main as you pointed out here #7537 (comment).

I'm open to reverting this, I've just found there's similar approaches in existing doctests even before this PR such as this written by Darksonn which I believe I mistakenly changed
https://github.com/tokio-rs/tokio/blob/master/tokio-stream/src/stream_ext.rs#L340-L344

ADD-SP · 2025-09-06T02:48:25Z

tokio-util/src/task/join_map.rs

JoinMap tests should not be disabled in wasm.

ADD-SP · 2025-09-06T02:52:36Z

tokio-util/src/task/task_tracker.rs

Could we enable doc tests?

ADD-SP · 2025-09-06T02:55:24Z

tokio-util/src/util/poll_buf.rs

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ use std::task::{ready, Context, Poll};
 ///
 /// # Example
 ///
-/// ```
+/// ```ignore-wasm


Could we enable this test?

ADD-SP · 2025-09-06T03:06:57Z

tokio/src/io/util/empty.rs

Could we enable doc tests?

ADD-SP · 2025-09-06T03:07:21Z

tokio/src/io/util/sink.rs

Could we enable doc tests?

ADD-SP · 2025-09-06T03:08:05Z

tokio/src/macros/join.rs

Could we enable doc tests?

ADD-SP · 2025-09-06T03:08:32Z

tokio/src/macros/pin.rs

Could we enable doc tests?

ADD-SP · 2025-09-06T03:08:41Z

tokio/src/macros/select.rs

Could we enable doc tests?

ADD-SP · 2025-09-06T03:08:53Z

tokio/src/macros/try_join.rs

Could we enable doc tests?

time: add ignore-wasm to failing wasm tests

02ad075

ADD-SP added A-tokio Area: The main tokio crate A-ci Area: The continuous integration setup labels Aug 16, 2025

lblack00 mentioned this pull request Aug 16, 2025

task: add ignore-wasm to failing wasm tests #7538

Closed

lblack00 changed the title ~~time: add ignore-wasm to failing wasm tests~~ ci: add ignore-wasm to failing wasm tests Aug 16, 2025

lblack00 added 2 commits August 16, 2025 00:46

task: add ignore-wasm to failing wasm tests

12e4572

sync: add ignore-wasm to failing wasm tests

3dfbeb3

github-actions bot added the R-loom-sync Run loom sync tests on this PR label Aug 16, 2025

runtime: add ignore-wasm to failing wasm tests

94c0796

github-actions bot added R-loom-current-thread Run loom current-thread tests on this PR R-loom-multi-thread Run loom multi-thread tests on this PR labels Aug 16, 2025

tokio|io|macros: add remaining ignore-wasm to failing doctests

92cb650

ci: unpin rust version for wasm tests

5a37a0b

lblack00 added 2 commits August 22, 2025 19:56

ci: update cfgs for WASI test tokio

9a1484e

tokio|tokio-stream|tokio-util - ignore failing wasm tests

ab2a5f5

lblack00 force-pushed the ignore-failed-time-wasm-tests branch from 8fb85d5 to ab2a5f5 Compare August 23, 2025 21:02

lblack00 added 2 commits August 23, 2025 14:15

Merge branch 'master' into ignore-failed-time-wasm-tests

6eaff54

test: revert changes to macros_type_mismatch.stderr

6dc771d

ADD-SP reviewed Aug 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

.github/workflows/ci.yml Show resolved Hide resolved

mox692 approved these changes Aug 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

ADD-SP reviewed Aug 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

ADD-SP reviewed Sep 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

tokio-stream/src/empty.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lblack00 added 3 commits September 2, 2025 16:03

stream: revert annotations and utilize futures::executor::block_on

5bf9656

ci|tokio: add RUSTDOCFLAGS and ignore subsequently failed tests

e0762b6

stream: use current_thread flavor instead of `futures::executor::bl…

2ea3529

…ock_on`

ADD-SP reviewed Sep 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

lblack00 added 2 commits September 5, 2025 10:25

stream|util: revert and update util and stream annotations

f0df0a1

util: lower memory allocated for sync_bridge.rs doctest

58f199e

ADD-SP reviewed Sep 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

Uh oh!

ci: add ignore-wasm to failing wasm tests #7537

Are you sure you want to change the base?

ci: add ignore-wasm to failing wasm tests #7537

Conversation

lblack00 commented Aug 16, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Motivation

Solution

Uh oh!

ADD-SP commented Aug 16, 2025

Uh oh!

lblack00 commented Aug 16, 2025

Uh oh!

mox692 commented Aug 16, 2025

Uh oh!

lblack00 commented Aug 16, 2025

Uh oh!

mox692 commented Aug 21, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mox692 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ADD-SP left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ADD-SP commented Aug 27, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mox692 commented Aug 27, 2025

Uh oh!

lblack00 commented Aug 27, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ADD-SP left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lblack00 Sep 5, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lblack00 commented Sep 5, 2025

Uh oh!

ADD-SP left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lblack00 Sep 6, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ci: add `ignore-wasm` to failing wasm tests #7537

ci: add `ignore-wasm` to failing wasm tests #7537

lblack00 commented Aug 16, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mox692 commented Aug 21, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ADD-SP left a comment •

edited

Loading

ADD-SP commented Aug 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

lblack00 Sep 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

lblack00 Sep 6, 2025 •

edited

Loading