Skip to content
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

Fix: add git repo checkout to testing workflows #14634

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 15, 2023
Merged

Fix: add git repo checkout to testing workflows #14634

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 15, 2023

Conversation

mcmilk
Copy link
Contributor

@mcmilk mcmilk commented Mar 15, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Motivation and Context

When the github runner images change, there are some hours (days?) with different action runner image versions.
I implemented check for this ... but this code path does not work, because the repo has not been checked out :(

This fix just checks out the repo.

Description

How Has This Been Tested?

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Performance enhancement (non-breaking change which improves efficiency)
  • Code cleanup (non-breaking change which makes code smaller or more readable)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
  • Library ABI change (libzfs, libzfs_core, libnvpair, libuutil and libzfsbootenv)
  • Documentation (a change to man pages or other documentation)

Checklist:

@mcmilk
Add git repo checkout to testing workflow
7b6fad5 
Signed-off-by: Tino Reichardt <milky-zfs@mcmilk.de>
@mcmilk mcmilk mentioned this pull request Mar 15, 2023
Merged
13 tasks
@mcmilk
Copy link
Contributor Author

mcmilk commented Mar 15, 2023

Just a note, the fix works ... part3 has wrong image, so the module gets re-build under "Generate debian packages"

@behlendorf behlendorf added the Status: Accepted Ready to integrate (reviewed, tested) label Mar 15, 2023
@behlendorf behlendorf merged commit c9c463a into openzfs:master Mar 15, 2023
@mcmilk mcmilk deleted the split-actions-fix branch March 15, 2023 22:52
@behlendorf
Copy link
Contributor

@mcmilk I just tried to re-run the fail job in the PR as a test. It seems to be failing because it can't locate the previous artifacts. Is this something we could support? It'd be really nice to be able to re-run those individual parts to see if an issue is reliably reproducible.

https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/actions/runs/4430184982

@gmelikov
Copy link
Member

@mcmilk a good point not to delete modules from artifacts? We may just shorten retention period https://github.com/actions/upload-artifact#retention-period

@mcmilk
Copy link
Contributor Author

mcmilk commented Mar 16, 2023 •
edited
Loading

@mcmilk I just tried to re-run the fail job in the PR as a test. It seems to be failing because it can't locate the previous artifacts. Is this something we could support? It'd be really nice to be able to re-run those individual parts to see if an issue is reliably reproducible.

Will be removed: mcmilk@faa590a
Tests are running: https://github.com/mcmilk/zfs/actions/runs/4435045147

@mcmilk
Copy link
Contributor Author

mcmilk commented Mar 16, 2023

@mcmilk a good point not to delete modules from artifacts? We may just shorten retention period https://github.com/actions/upload-artifact#retention-period

For the modules only? Or for all artifacts?

@gmelikov
Copy link
Member

IMHO we may shorten retention period only for artifacts which we were ready to delete immediately, other artifacts may use default 90 days.

@mcmilk
Copy link
Contributor Author

mcmilk commented Mar 16, 2023

IMHO we may shorten retention period only for artifacts which we were ready to delete immediately, other artifacts may use default 90 days.

okay, I will shorten the modules and zloop error artifacts to 14 days ... all other remain default.

lundman pushed a commit to openzfsonwindows/openzfs that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2023
@mcmilk @lundman
Add git repo checkout to testing workflow
6cefd2b 
Reviewed-by: George Melikov <mail@gmelikov.ru>
Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Signed-off-by: Tino Reichardt <milky-zfs@mcmilk.de>
Closes openzfs#14634
lundman pushed a commit to openzfsonwindows/openzfs that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2023
@mcmilk @lundman
Add git repo checkout to testing workflow
603a28d 
Reviewed-by: George Melikov <mail@gmelikov.ru>
Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Signed-off-by: Tino Reichardt <milky-zfs@mcmilk.de>
Closes openzfs#14634
lundman pushed a commit to openzfsonwindows/openzfs that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2023
@mcmilk @lundman
Add git repo checkout to testing workflow
5e403e7 
Reviewed-by: George Melikov <mail@gmelikov.ru>
Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Signed-off-by: Tino Reichardt <milky-zfs@mcmilk.de>
Closes openzfs#14634
lundman pushed a commit to openzfsonwindows/openzfs that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2023
@mcmilk @lundman
Add git repo checkout to testing workflow
4fbeb2b 
Reviewed-by: George Melikov <mail@gmelikov.ru>
Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Signed-off-by: Tino Reichardt <milky-zfs@mcmilk.de>
Closes openzfs#14634
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@gmelikov gmelikov gmelikov approved these changes

@behlendorf behlendorf behlendorf approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Status: Accepted Ready to integrate (reviewed, tested)
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@mcmilk @behlendorf @gmelikov