Skip to content

[CI] Don't try to run detect changes for large PR #17728

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.

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

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Apr 1, 2025

Conversation

jsji
Copy link
Contributor

@jsji jsji commented Mar 30, 2025

@jsji jsji requested a review from a team as a code owner March 30, 2025 14:36
@aelovikov-intel
Copy link
Contributor

aelovikov-intel commented Mar 31, 2025

It "worked" (as in not crashing) for every pulldown before, what has changed?

@sarnex
Copy link
Contributor

sarnex commented Mar 31, 2025

Yeah we already have the same check below, so I'm not sure what changed or how this addresses the problem we're seeing

@jsji
Copy link
Contributor Author

jsji commented Mar 31, 2025

It "worked" (as in not crashing) for every pulldown before, what has changed?

Looks like the latest pulldown is much larger than before, so it is crashing.

@jsji
Copy link
Contributor Author

jsji commented Mar 31, 2025

Yeah we already have the same check below, so I'm not sure what changed or how this addresses the problem we're seeing

The fix will skip the step that is crashing (line 31 is the most interested line), hopefully, we can bypass the crash. (I can't verifiy as pushing to to pulldown branch did not take effect).

@@ -81,8 +91,6 @@ jobs:
uses: actions/github-script@v7
with:
script: |
console.log("Number of files changed:");
console.log(context.payload.pull_request.changed_files);
if (context.payload.pull_request.changed_files < 500) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if we moved the if to the job level can we remove it here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We still need this to choose the outputs, unless we set the default output in 1st step too.

- name: Check file changes
uses: dorny/paths-filter@de90cc6fb38fc0963ad72b210f1f284cd68cea36
if: ${{ steps.changed_files.outputs.changed_files }} < 500
Copy link
Contributor

@aelovikov-intel aelovikov-intel Mar 31, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
if: ${{ steps.changed_files.outputs.changed_files }} < 500
if: ${{ context.payload.pull_request.changed_files }} < 500

to have the same condition here and on line 94 (and it's just a few characters difference, so not important). Once done, previous step can be changed/renamed to simply logging-related.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@jsji jsji temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock March 31, 2025 17:54 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
@jsji jsji requested review from sarnex and aelovikov-intel March 31, 2025 17:54
@jsji jsji temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock March 31, 2025 18:18 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
@jsji jsji temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock March 31, 2025 18:18 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
@jsji
Copy link
Contributor Author

jsji commented Apr 1, 2025

@intel/llvm-gatekeepers Can someone help to merge this? Thanks.

@uditagarwal97 uditagarwal97 merged commit 16a14c9 into intel:sycl Apr 1, 2025
22 of 23 checks passed
ggojska pushed a commit to ggojska/llvm that referenced this pull request Apr 7, 2025
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