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.

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

ci: Run unit test + downstream on main ubuntu build (gitlab) #4020

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 15, 2025

Conversation

paulgessinger
Copy link
Member

@paulgessinger paulgessinger commented Jan 10, 2025

--- END COMMIT MESSAGE ---

Any further description goes here, @-mentions are ok here!

  • Use a conventional commits prefix: quick summary
    • We mostly use feat, fix, refactor, docs, chore and build types.
  • A milestone will be assigned by one of the maintainers

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Enhanced CI/CD pipeline configuration
    • Added integration test execution
    • Improved build and installation process
    • Introduced downstream project configuration and testing

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 10, 2025

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

Walkthrough

Changes to the GitLab CI configuration, there are. Enhance the build process for Linux Ubuntu, these modifications shall. New commands added to run integration tests, install the project, and configure a downstream project, they have. Comprehensive testing and build workflow, this represents - expanding the continuous integration capabilities, yes.

Changes

File Change Summary
.gitlab-ci.yml Added commands to:
- Run tests with ctest
- Build integration tests
- Install main project
- Configure and build downstream project

Suggested labels

Infrastructure, automerge

Suggested reviewers

  • AJPfleger

Possibly related PRs

A Poem of Build and Test, I Shall Compose 🤖
In GitLab's realm of green and white,
Builds dance with tests, a coder's delight
Commands flow like the Force, so bright
Integration's path, now clear and tight
Downstream projects, take their flight! 🚀

No Sequence Diagram Needed

Complexity of sequence not high enough, a diagram would be, hmm. Simple CI configuration changes, these are.


📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4b88e60 and 25f62d9.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .gitlab-ci.yml (1 hunks)

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the next milestone Jan 10, 2025
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
.gitlab-ci.yml (1)

244-248: Handle failures gracefully, a Jedi must.

Missing error handling for the version check, I sense. Add it, we should.

Apply this change to handle errors:

-    # Downstream run
-    - ./build-downstream/bin/ShowActsVersion
+    # Downstream run with error handling
+    - |
+      if ! ./build-downstream/bin/ShowActsVersion; then
+        echo "Failed to run ShowActsVersion. Investigate the installation we must."
+        exit 1
+      fi
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d6eb834 and 1e74758.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .gitlab-ci.yml (1 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (4)
  • GitHub Check: macos
  • GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu_extra (ubuntu2204, 20)
  • GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu
  • GitHub Check: docs
🔇 Additional comments (3)
.gitlab-ci.yml (3)

229-230: Wise choice, running tests in parallel is! Hmmmm.

Efficient use of resources, I sense. Integration tests separately built, they are. Good practices, these changes follow.


232-233: Install the project properly, we must.

Clear and necessary, this installation step is. For downstream project, essential it becomes.


235-242: Verify the installation path, we should.

Comprehensive, the downstream configuration is. But verify the INSTALL_DIR variable's presence and value, we must.

Run this command to check the variable's definition:

✅ Verification successful

Properly defined, the installation path is.

In both GitLab and GitHub realms, correctly set the INSTALL_DIR variable is. Peace of mind, this brings to our downstream configuration.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if INSTALL_DIR is properly defined
rg -A 1 "INSTALL_DIR:" .gitlab-ci.yml

Length of output: 134

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 10, 2025

📊: Physics performance monitoring for 25f62d9

Full contents

physmon summary

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
.gitlab-ci.yml (2)

229-230: Preserve the test results, you must!

Wise to run tests in parallel, it is. But artifacts for test results, we should keep, hmm.

Add this configuration, you shall:

    - ctest --test-dir build -j$(nproc)
+   - ctest --test-dir build -j$(nproc) --output-junit test_results.xml
    - cmake --build build --target integrationtests

232-233: Clear path to installation, define we should.

Correct the installation step is, but explicit installation path, specify we must.

Modify thus, you shall:

    # Install main project
-   - cmake --install build
+   - cmake --install build --prefix "${INSTALL_DIR}"
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1e74758 and 4b88e60.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .gitlab-ci.yml (1 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (9)
  • GitHub Check: merge-sentinel
  • GitHub Check: unused_files
  • GitHub Check: missing_includes
  • GitHub Check: macos
  • GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu_extra (ubuntu2204_clang, 20)
  • GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu_extra (ubuntu2204, 20)
  • GitHub Check: docs
  • GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu
  • GitHub Check: build_debug
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.gitlab-ci.yml (1)

235-241: Strong with the Force, this configuration is.

Wise choices made, I see. Ninja generator for speed, warnings as errors for quality, and correct path for dependencies, you have chosen.

.gitlab-ci.yml Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@AJPfleger AJPfleger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This shouldn't have a huge impact on the performance. Looks good!

@kodiakhq kodiakhq bot merged commit e7a1388 into acts-project:main Jan 15, 2025
41 of 42 checks passed
@acts-project-service acts-project-service added the Fails Athena tests This PR causes a failure in the Athena tests label Jan 16, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Fails Athena tests This PR causes a failure in the Athena tests
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants