ci: move tests from x86_64-gnu-llvm-19 job to aarch64

[marcoieni]

This PR splits the tests of the x86_64-gnu-llvm-19 job in multiple jobs, using two free runners and one 8 core ARM large runner instead of one 16 core x86 runner.

One job is still on x86 because it is fast enough.

We are effectively replacing a 16 core large runner with an 8 core, which is more efficient.

[marcoieni]

error: Command cd "/checkout/obj/build/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/gcc/build" && "make" "--silent" "-j4" (failure_mode=Exit) has failed. Rerun with -v to see more details.

Not sure what's the issue. I'm removing ENABLE_GCC_CODEGEN: "1"

[Kobzol]

Oh, right. I think that GCC currently only works for x64.

[marcoieni]

it's nice that x86_64-gnu-llvm-19 finished in only 34 minutes!

• Probably we could use a 4 core runner.

but I don't know why the arm runner is failing now 😵

[jieyouxu]

but I don't know why the arm runner is failing now 😵

#128973

You'll probably need to add a //@ ignore-aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu (gdb tries to read from 0x0; FIXME: #128973) to ignore that debuginfo test.

[marcoieni]

Thanks, I'll do that. At the same time I wonder why this works

[jieyouxu]

I wonder if they're using different gdb versions, if you want to find out exactly you'll probably need to compare the two gdb versions used, but that test is already kinda broken for aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu / windows-gnu anyway.

[marcoieni]

this is the failing test: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/run-make/mte-ffi/bar_float.c

[jieyouxu]

I'm surprised that test doesn't fail on aarch64-gnu, did that test never manage to run?

[marcoieni]

I'm also surprised. yes, it runs.
check the run of b5eb989 (raw log here).

[jieyouxu]

I'm also surprised. yes, it runs.

can you slap a FIXME pointing to #141600

[rustbot]

This PR modifies run-make tests.

cc @jieyouxu

[marcoieni]

@rustbot ready

[Kobzol]

Hmm, together with #119899 this will make the PR CI workflows quite a mess, I hope that it will still be reasonably easy to reproduce the failures locally..

[marcoieni]

Doesn't the method described in this readme work?

[Kobzol]

Hopefully yes, what I meant was that some aarch64 specific failures might be hard to reproduce on x64. But these failures would happen on an auto build anyway, so that shouldn't be a UX regression.

[Kobzol]

This is a bit time sensitive due to our CI spending. Approving this eagerly, if we run into any issues in practice, we can always revert.

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 1b7a927 has been approved by Kobzol

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[jieyouxu]

r? Kobzol

[jieyouxu]

@bors p=5 (can be included in rollup)

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 1b7a927 with merge 40311c4...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Kobzol
Pushing 40311c4 to master...

[github-actions]

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing 77101fe (parent) -> 40311c4 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 1 test diff

Stage 2

• [debuginfo-gdb] tests/debuginfo/by-value-non-immediate-argument.rs: ignore (ignored when the GDB version is lower than 13.0) -> ignore (ignored when the target is aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu ((gdb tries to read from 0x0; FIXME: gdb on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/windows-gnu cannot print unused by-value non-immediate arguments #128973))) (J0)

Job group index

• J0: aarch64-gnu

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 40311c4dcf666e8bddcec4a8059e7d9f12bbd363 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

1. x86_64-apple-2: 4791.8s -> 5985.6s (24.9%)
2. dist-x86_64-apple: 8899.7s -> 7075.7s (-20.5%)
3. dist-aarch64-linux: 5393.7s -> 6255.4s (16.0%)
4. aarch64-gnu-debug: 4784.3s -> 4048.1s (-15.4%)
5. x86_64-apple-1: 6886.6s -> 7928.8s (15.1%)
6. dist-apple-various: 7273.4s -> 7970.5s (9.6%)
7. aarch64-apple: 4964.7s -> 5392.9s (8.6%)
8. x86_64-rust-for-linux: 2628.6s -> 2797.9s (6.4%)
9. dist-x86_64-freebsd: 4984.9s -> 5304.6s (6.4%)
10. dist-x86_64-msvc: 6088.0s -> 6463.5s (6.2%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (40311c4): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary -4.7%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.7%	[-4.7%, -4.7%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results (secondary -2.0%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.0%	[-2.0%, -2.0%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 777.676s -> 778.629s (0.12%)
Artifact size: 368.53 MiB -> 368.47 MiB (-0.02%)