-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
Use WASM CoreLib when compiling crossgen2 WASM unit tests #131024
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
jtschuster
wants to merge
6
commits into
dotnet:main
Choose a base branch
from
jtschuster:jtschuster-wasm-r2r-crossgen-test
base: main
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and old review comments may become outdated.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
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
fa59f6d
Use Wasm runtime pack for building wasm in ILCompiler.ReadyToRun.Tests
jtschuster 4f17299
Clean up ILCompiler.ReadyToRun.Tests.csproj
jtschuster 03717e7
Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/dotnet/runtime into jtschus…
jtschuster 898d14b
Cleanup
jtschuster 08fc40a
Address copilot feedback
jtschuster 7e40733
Check runtime pack dir exists before enumerating
jtschuster 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
Some comments aren't visible on the classic Files Changed page.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
Instead of all this hackery and optional WASM builds, can we add a separate ToolsTests leg (ReadyToRunTests) that simply builds the runtime as
-arch wasmand then one more leg that builds as-arch arm?We might want to move ILCompiler.ReadyToRun.Tests out of toolstests as part of that since none of the other toolstests are actually architecture specific and it's a waste of time to run them.
I believe we'll not need any of the project file hackery if we do that because CoreLib that is passed to the tests will simply be the correct corelib. The attributes in the tests can still decide whether the test should run or not.
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.
We'd also be able to undo parts of #129791, specifically ba3edd9 and a2b9874 because we'd no longer need host-flavored flavor of all the JITs, only the host-flavored JIT that we're testing.