In order to make the behavior of the libc++ restarter more visible
to users, this change creates a check run on the considered workflow
to let users know what action, if any, was taken
This patch introduces `SemaAMDGPU`, `SemaARM`, `SemaBPF`, `SemaHexagon`,
`SemaLoongArch`, `SemaMIPS`, `SemaNVPTX`, `SemaPPC`, `SemaSystemZ`,
`SemaWasm`. This continues previous efforts to split Sema up. Additional
context can be found in #84184 and #92682.
I decided to bundle target-specific components together because of their
low impact on `Sema`. That said, their impact on `SemaChecking.cpp` is
far from low, and I consider it a success.
Somewhat accidentally, I also moved Wasm- and AMDGPU-specific function
from `SemaDeclAttr.cpp`, because they were exposed in `Sema`. That went
well, and I consider it a success, too. I'd like to move the rest of
static target-specific functions out of `SemaDeclAttr.cpp` like we're
doing with built-ins in `SemaChecking.cpp` .
- `llvm/**/ProfileData/**/*` intends to cover `llvm/include/llvm/ProfileData/` and `llvm/lib/ProfileData/`
- `llvm/**/SampleProfile*` intends to cover a bunch of SamplePGO files and their headers. For example,
`SampleProfile.cpp`, `SampleProfileMatcher.cpp`, `SampleProfileProbe.cpp`
- `llvm/**/CodeGen/MIRSampleProfile*` intends to cover MIRSampleProfile.cpp and its header.
- `llvm/test/Transforms/SampleProfile/**/*` intends to cover unit tests.
I've been running a cronjob on my local machine to restart preempted
libc++ CI runs. This is bad and brittle. This upstreams a much better
version of the restarter.
It works by matching on check run annotations looking for mention
of the machine being shutdown.
If there are both preempted jobs and failing jobs, we don't restart
the workflow. Maybe we should change that?
This updates the release-binaries workflow so that the different build
stages are split across multiple jobs. This saves money by reducing the
time spent on the larger github runners and also makes it easier to
debug, because now it's possible to build a smaller release package
(with clang and lld) using only the free GitHub runners.
The workflow no longer uses the test-release.sh script but instead uses
the Release.cmake cache. This gives the workflow more flexibility and
ensures that the binary package will always be created even if the tests
fail.
This idea to split the stages comes from the "LLVM Precommit CI through
Github Actions" RFC:
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-llvm-precommit-ci-through-github-actions/76456
Add wheel publishing in addition to existing source distribution
publishing of lit.
Fixes#63369. This also uses the exact fix proposed by @EFord36 in
#63369.
Signed-off-by: Schuyler Eldridge <schuyler.eldridge@sifive.com>
Since we have released Clang 16 is no longer actively supported. However
the FreeBSD runner is still using this, so some tests still guard
against Clang 16.
The recent change to split the PR code formatting job accidentally
misspelled the repository field when specifying the repository to fetch
the code formatting utils from. This patch fixes the spelling so that
the job does not throw a warning and clones the tools from the specified
repository.
I'm hoping this will fix the errors we've been seeing the last few days:
2024-03-19T20:44:07.4841482Z 2024/03/19 20:44:07 error signing scorecard
json results: error signing payload: getting key from Fulcio: verifying
SCT: updating local metadata and targets: error updating to TUF remote
mirror: invalid key
Actions triggered by pull_request_target events have access to all
repository secrets, so it is unsafe to use them when executing untrusted
code. The pr-code-format workflow does not execute any untrusted code,
but it passes untrused input into clang-format. An attacker could use
this to exploit a flaw in clang-format and potentially gain access to
the repository secrets.
By splitting the workflow, we can use the pull_request target which is
more secure and isolate the issue write permissions in a separate job.
The pull_request target also makes it easier to test changes to the
code-format-helepr.py script, because the version of the script from the
pull request will be used rather than the version of the script from
main.
Fixes#77142
