-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.8k
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
[R-package] [ci] Add test on R package with sanitizers #3439
Conversation
I don't think that 22 min is something unacceptable for us. For example, right now duration of some tests is about 17 min. So, given that we have 20 free parallel builds for GitHub Actions, I believe we can run new test just as a normal check. I remember old times before rebalancing CI jobs when we had to wait about 40min-1h 😄 . |
haha ok! I'll move it back to the main R GitHub Actions then |
@jameslamb BTW, haven't you find a way to make one particular check "optional, but if run then required to be passed"? |
no, I'm not sure how to do that, sorry! |
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.
Wow! Amazing job as always! I'm pleasantly surprised that we can use container and write just few lines to have a sanitizers checks. Looks great overall, just check my minor comments below.
run: | | ||
cd R-package/tests | ||
Rscriptdevel testthat.R 2>&1 > ubsan-tests.log | ||
cat ubsan-tests.log |
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.
Was it left intentionally or it was for debugging purposes?
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 left it in intentionally, so that if the job fails you have enough logs to be able to tell what went wrong
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.
OK.
No problem! Just wanted to be sure that I'm not discovering something that is already known 🙂 . Looks like it is impossible to do such things with standard GitHub Actions API. But I have an idea to use REST API and query a status of required workflow via it in our cool LightGBM/.github/workflows/r_package.yml Lines 162 to 168 in 186711d
https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/rest/reference/actions#get-a-workflow-run |
Co-authored-by: Nikita Titov <nekit94-08@mail.ru>
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.
+1 step towards CRAN, nice!
@jameslamb What do you think about moving all out R jobs into containers? It looks quite comfortable to have all R infrastructure and do not waste CI time to install it (very often with network errors, BTW) by our own. 🙂 |
OK, today I went ahead and prepared a draft for this feature. I tested it a little bit and it looks like it can work 👍 . # .ci/check_workflow_status.py
import json
from os import environ
from sys import exit
from time import sleep
from urllib import request
def get_runs():
with request.urlopen("https://api.github.com/repos/microsoft/LightGBM/actions/workflows/test_1.yml/runs") as url:
data = json.loads(url.read().decode())
pr_runs = []
if environ.get("GITHUB_EVENT_NAME", "") == "pull_request":
pr_runs = [i for i in data['workflow_runs']
if i['event'] == 'pull_request_review_comment' and
(i.get('pull_requests') and
i['pull_requests'][0]['number'] == int(environ.get("GITHUB_REF").split('/')[-2]) or
i['head_branch'] == environ.get("GITHUB_HEAD_REF").split('/')[-1])]
return sorted(pr_runs, key=lambda i: i['run_number'], reverse=True)
def get_status(runs):
status = 'ok'
for run in runs:
if run['status'] == 'completed':
if run['conclusion'] in {'cancelled', 'skipped'}:
continue
if run['conclusion'] in {'failure', 'timed_out'}:
status = 'fail'
break
if run['conclusion'] == 'success':
break
if run['status'] in {'in_progress', 'queued'}:
status = 'rerun'
break
return status
if __name__ == "__main__":
while True:
status = get_status(get_runs())
if status != 'rerun':
break
sleep(60)
if status == 'fail':
exit(1) # .github/workflows/test_1.yml
name: Test 1
on:
pull_request_review_comment:
types: [created]
jobs:
test:
name: Test 1
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
if: github.event.comment.body == '/gha run' && contains('OWNER,MEMBER,COLLABORATOR', github.event.comment.author_association)
timeout-minutes: 60
strategy:
fail-fast: false
steps:
- name: Checkout repository
uses: actions/checkout@v1
with:
fetch-depth: 5
submodules: true
- name: Test
run: |
sleep 2m
exit -1 # .github/workflows/r_package.yml
...
all-successful:
# https://gh.neting.ccmunity/t/is-it-possible-to-require-all-github-actions-tasks-to-pass-without-enumerating-them/117957/4?u=graingert
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
needs: [test]
steps:
- name: Checkout repository
uses: actions/checkout@v1
with:
fetch-depth: 5
submodules: false
- name: Install Python
uses: actions/setup-python@v2
with:
python-version: '3.x'
- name: Note that all tests succeeded
run: python "$GITHUB_WORKSPACE/.ci/check_workflow_status.py" |
Probably it is possible to simplify it to just one comment with the help of https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/rest/reference/actions#re-run-a-workflow. But I'm not sure about the required permissions though. |
I think that would only work for Linux builds, and that that wouldn't help much unfortunately...since most of the temporary errors in CI have been on Mac and Windows. |
oooo interesting! Are you thinking about something like this for the checks in #3424 and #3443 ? |
@guolinke Could you please generate a secret access token for LightGBM repository with |
@StrikerRUS you can check |
@guolinke Thanks a lot! Unfortunately, I don't have an access to this tab of LightGBM repo settings: But I think it shouldn't block me from using |
yeah, you can use it as |
This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity since it was closed. To start a new related discussion, open a new issue at https://github.com/microsoft/LightGBM/issues including a reference to this. |
This PR adds tests with the sanitizers run by CRAN on package submissions. See this blog post for a lot more background.
The tests take 22 minutes to run, so in this PR I'm proposing that we add them as a manual test that can be triggered by a comment (copying @StrikerRUS 's great work on #3424 ).
This can be triggered by commenting
/gha run r-sanitizers-check
on a PR.How this makes
LightGBM
betterlib_lightgbm