-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.8k
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
make -J behavior default in test.py #40945
Conversation
@@ -1423,7 +1423,7 @@ def ProcessOptions(options): | |||
if options.run[0] >= options.run[1]: | |||
print("The test group to run (n) must be smaller than number of groups (m).") | |||
return False | |||
if options.J: | |||
if options.j == 0: |
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.
This changes precedence of the -j
and -J
flags, e.g. if test.py -j 3 -J
was run and JOBS=2
then the old code would have overwritten the j
value from JOBS
but the new code would leave j
unchanged.
It's probably a rare edge case that both flags would be specified.
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.
If we keep it so -J
effectively negates -j
, we'll have to update the help text to indicate that -J
doesn't quite have no effect at all.
If we want to preserve that behavior, then perhaps the thing to do is print a warning when someone is using both -J
and -j
? Or maybe print a warning every time -J
is used?
I suspect, like you, that this is a rare edge case. I also suspect that it basically does not matter. Like, if we run with 2 processes instead of 4 (or the other way around) in a rare edge case....oh well?
@richardlau Would you be comfortable if we kept the behavior as it is in this PR but add a warning that gets printed if both -j
and -J
are specified?
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'd be okay with that.
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.
@richardlau Would you be comfortable if we kept the behavior as it is in this PR but add a warning that gets printed if both
-j
and-J
are specified?
This is the behavior I've implemented in a fixup commit. PTAL.
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.
lgtm sans the conflict markers in BUILDING.md
Landed in e64c66c...a257294 |
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #40945 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
No description provided.