-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 765
[SYCL][E2E] Check for run-time features when in build-only #17988
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
Open
ayylol
wants to merge
4
commits into
intel:sycl
Choose a base branch
from
ayylol:build-feature-check
base: sycl
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you mind explaining why we need to error if an unknown feature is true at build time? If there's an feature not in this list and it evaluates as true at build time doesn't that tell us it's a build-time feature and we don't need the list?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In build-only we ignore the run-time features because we expect them to always evaluate to false. So when a feature is not marked as build specific and it evaluates to true it means one of two things: It is a run-time feature which is incorrectly evaluating to true in build-only, or it is a build feature that was not added to the build features list, and thus we are incorrectly ignoring it. The latter is the more common case which I'm trying to make more visible. Since prior to these changes we would catch these issues only if the feature evaluated to true on the system, and was used in a
REQUIRES
/UNSUPPORTED
.The reason why we need the list, and cant just rely on the features that end up evaluating to true on build-only is because some of these features may evaluate to false on other systems/configurations, but we know that they should not be ignored. i.e., if we are missing the
vulkan
library we will fail building tests that requirevulkan
so this feature should not be ignored even if it evaluates to false.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
got it, thanks for the clear explanation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Or, third option, this was mis-spelled and there is no such feature. Although maybe we catch that somewhere else now (there was a PR but I'm not sure if it was merged, @AlexeySachkov , @KornevNikita , @dm-vodopyanov might know?..)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Unfortunately this PR drowned in discussion (if you mean this one) ((maybe one day it will be finished)).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
you linked to this pr, is that intentional?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lol of course not, I mean this one - #16019