HEAD crash after incompatible_enforce_config_setting_visibility

[keith]

Description of the bug:

FATAL: bazel crashed due to an internal error. Printing stack trace:
java.lang.RuntimeException: Unrecoverable error while evaluating node 'ConfiguredTargetKey{label=//doc:test_setup, config=BuildConfigurationKey[630cafa1c48a364b2467476885d51433a52c036dcff80d6d9ae99bce1a4ff886]}' (requested by nodes )
        at com.google.devtools.build.skyframe.AbstractParallelEvaluator$Evaluate.run(AbstractParallelEvaluator.java:642)
        at com.google.devtools.build.lib.concurrent.AbstractQueueVisitor$WrappedRunnable.run(AbstractQueueVisitor.java:382)
        at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.exec(Unknown Source)
        at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec(Unknown Source)
        at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue.topLevelExec(Unknown Source)
        at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.scan(Unknown Source)
        at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.runWorker(Unknown Source)
        at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinWorkerThread.run(Unknown Source)
Caused by: java.lang.IllegalStateException: Configurations don't match: BuildConfigurationKey[630cafa1c48a364b2467476885d51433a52c036dcff80d6d9ae99bce1a4ff886] BuildConfigurationKey[6a7278dae5db84a0f240ae2ba630f3e2171f37f2bbf86ba0cd0f54949d474623] 630cafa1c48a364b2467476885d51433a52c036dcff80d6d9ae99bce1a4ff886 (ConfiguredTarget(@bazel_tools//src/conditions:host_windows_x64_constraint, 6a7278dae5db84a0f240ae2ba630f3e2171f37f2bbf86ba0cd0f54949d474623) config_setting rule @bazel_tools//src/conditions:host_windows_x64_constraint)
        at com.google.common.base.Preconditions.checkState(Preconditions.java:534)
        at com.google.devtools.build.lib.skyframe.ConfiguredTargetAndData.<init>(ConfiguredTargetAndData.java:72)
        at com.google.devtools.build.lib.skyframe.ConfiguredTargetAndData.fromConfiguredTarget(ConfiguredTargetAndData.java:124)
        at com.google.devtools.build.lib.analysis.RuleContext$Builder.build(RuleContext.java:1759)
        at com.google.devtools.build.lib.analysis.RuleContext$Builder.build(RuleContext.java:1704)
        at com.google.devtools.build.lib.analysis.ConfiguredTargetFactory.createRule(ConfiguredTargetFactory.java:324)
        at com.google.devtools.build.lib.analysis.ConfiguredTargetFactory.createConfiguredTarget(ConfiguredTargetFactory.java:192)
        at com.google.devtools.build.lib.skyframe.SkyframeBuildView.createConfiguredTarget(SkyframeBuildView.java:1231)
        at com.google.devtools.build.lib.skyframe.ConfiguredTargetFunction.createConfiguredTarget(ConfiguredTargetFunction.java:1197)
        at com.google.devtools.build.lib.skyframe.ConfiguredTargetFunction.compute(ConfiguredTargetFunction.java:414)
        at com.google.devtools.build.skyframe.AbstractParallelEvaluator$Evaluate.run(AbstractParallelEvaluator.java:571)
        ... 7 more

What's the simplest, easiest way to reproduce this bug? Please provide a minimal example if possible.

Clone rules_swift, run USE_BAZEL_VERSION=174c67f0911c1cb013658f9b2b2d8959d6ef388c bazelisk build ...

I bisected to 174c67f, setting the flag to false does not avoid it

CI logs: https://buildkite.com/bazel/rules-swift-swift/builds/3745#0183c3e2-c2a4-4abc-9330-16b8c93f1b71

Which operating system are you running Bazel on?

macOS

What is the output of bazel info release?

174c67f

If bazel info release returns development version or (@non-git), tell us how you built Bazel.

No response

What's the output of git remote get-url origin; git rev-parse master; git rev-parse HEAD ?

No response

Have you found anything relevant by searching the web?

No response

Any other information, logs, or outputs that you want to share?

No response

[keith]

cc @gregestren

[gregestren]

Thanks for the repro: I was trying to figure out how to trigger this from #12932 (comment).

[gregestren]

More direct:

USE_BAZEL_VERSION=174c67f0911c1cb013658f9b2b2d8959d6ef388c bazelisk build //doc:test_setup

[gregestren]

Found a minimal repro:

$ cat aa/defs.bzl
def _impl(ctx):
    output = ctx.outputs.out
    ctx.actions.write(output = output, content = "hi", is_executable = True)
    return [DefaultInfo(executable = output)]

fake_test = rule(
    attrs = {
        "msg": attr.string(),
    },
    test = True,
    outputs = {"out": "foo.out"},
    implementation = _impl,
)

$ cat aa/BUILD
load(":defs.bzl", "fake_test")

config_setting(
    name = "actual_setting",
    define_values = {"a": "1"},
)

alias(
    name = "alias_setting",
    actual = ":actual_setting",
)

fake_test(
    name = "foo",
    msg = select({
        ":alias_setting": "hi",
        "//conditions:default": "there",
    }),
)

$ bazel build //aa:foo --incompatible_enforce_config_setting_visibility --trim_test_configuration
<crash>

This is how I found it:

• $ bazel query --output=build //doc:test_setup
• Built a filegroup target with the same select() as in the above.
• That succeeded.
• Since Bazel didn't crash, I could run $ bazel config 630c 6a72
• That showed me that one config had TestOptions while the other didn't
• That's basically the definition of --trim_test_configuration. This also explains why the filegroup succeeded but diff_test didn't: --trim_test_configuration only trims non-test targets. So in the failing build you get two distinct configurations: one for the *_test* and one for the config_setting it depends on

[gregestren]

https://bazel-review.googlesource.com/c/bazel/+/205341 will fix.

[meteorcloudy]

Looks like the fix still need some tweaks, I'm rolling back the flag flip first.