Hello, Sergey,

thanks for the patch!

 > [PATCH luajit] test: disable lj-1196 for Tarantool or x86/x64

s/or/on/?

On 7/21/25 11:16, Sergey Kaplun wrote:
> The test may lead to the assertion failure if run under Tarantool.
> Also, the skip condition for the Tarantool leads to stable fails for
> some builds on x86/x64 architecture, so they are skipped as well.
> See details in the comment to the skip conditions.
> ---

I suppose you want to disable it temporarily, do we need an issue as a 
reminder?

LGTM
>
> Branch:https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/tree/skaplun/disable-lj-1196-tarantool
>
> Originally I want to disable the test only for Tarantool, but faced
> multiple failures in the different workflows:
> https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/actions/runs/16410069543
>
>   .../lj-1196-partial-snap-restore.test.lua                | 9 ++++++++-
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-1196-partial-snap-restore.test.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-1196-partial-snap-restore.test.lua
> index 4ab78d31..5199ca00 100644
> --- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-1196-partial-snap-restore.test.lua
> +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-1196-partial-snap-restore.test.lua
> @@ -4,7 +4,14 @@ local tap = require('tap')
>   -- in case of the stack overflow.
>   -- See also:https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/1196.
>   
> -local test = tap.test('lj-1196-partial-snap-restore')
> +local test = tap.test('lj-1196-partial-snap-restore'):skipcond({
> +  -- Disable test for Tarantool to avoid failures, see also:
> +  --https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/1369.
> +  ['Disabled for Tarantool due to lj-1369'] = _TARANTOOL,
> +  -- Also, it may fail on some non-arm64 runners stable after
> +  -- adding the skip condition above.
> +  ['Disabled for x86/x64 due to lj-1369'] = jit.arch ~= 'arm64',
> +})
>   
>   test:plan(1)
>