Hello, Sergey,

thanks for the patch!

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

s/or/on/?

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?

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)