-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 742
ci: use stable again moving forward Rust for Linux job #3189
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Conversation
v6.14 is the latest tag and it contains v6.14-rc2 which included the fix for the `soft-float` error (commit 6273a058383e ("x86: rust: set rustc-abi=x86-softfloat on rustc>=1.86.0") in Linux). Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Now that the Rust for Linux job is moved forward to v6.14, we can use Rust 1.86.0, i.e. the current stable, again. Thus revert the previous change. Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
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.
Thanks!
@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ if [ "$BINDGEN_RUST_FOR_LINUX_TEST" == "1" ]; then | |||
# and each update should only contain this change. | |||
# | |||
# Both commit hashes and tags are supported. | |||
LINUX_VERSION=v6.14-rc1 | |||
LINUX_VERSION=v6.14 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Gah, so I was off by a RC then ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, that was very bad luck... :)
@@ -125,13 +125,13 @@ CONFIG_KUNIT=y | |||
CONFIG_RUST_KERNEL_DOCTESTS=y | |||
EOF | |||
|
|||
make -C linux KBUILD_VERBOSE=1 LLVM=1 -j$(($(nproc) + 1)) \ | |||
make -C linux LLVM=1 -j$(($(nproc) + 1)) \ |
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.
I think this might still be useful but either way. Yeah maybe it's too verbose.
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.
Yeah, I wasn't sure if you intended to keep it or it was just for debugging the issue, so I left the tree as it was before this happened.
It is fairly verbose, yeah; on the other hand, we build a tiny part of the kernel, so it should be OK.
See individual commits.
Fixes: #3188