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

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

[Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches]

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.
---

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)
 
-- 
2.50.0

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

[Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1873 bytes --]

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)
>   

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2946 bytes --]

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

[Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches]

Hi, Sergey!
Thanks for the review!

On 21.07.25, Sergey Bronnikov wrote:
> Hello, Sergey,
> 
> thanks for the patch!
> 
>  > [PATCH luajit] test: disable lj-1196 for Tarantool or x86/x64
> 
> s/or/on/?

No, since I've meant that either Tarantool or the corresponding arch
doesn't run this test.

> 
> 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?

I suppose not. It should be enabled back alongside the backporting
commit for the 1369.

> 
> 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
> >

<snipped>

-- 
Best regards,
Sergey Kaplun

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

[Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1159 bytes --]

LGTM

On 7/21/25 15:29, Sergey Kaplun wrote:
> Hi, Sergey!
> Thanks for the review!
>
> On 21.07.25, Sergey Bronnikov wrote:
>> Hello, Sergey,
>>
>> thanks for the patch!
>>
>>   > [PATCH luajit] test: disable lj-1196 for Tarantool or x86/x64
>>
>> s/or/on/?
> No, since I've meant that either Tarantool or the corresponding arch
> doesn't run this test.
>
>> 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?
> I suppose not. It should be enabled back alongside the backporting
> commit for the 1369.
>
>> 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
>>>
> <snipped>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2448 bytes --]

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

[Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches]

I've rephrased the header of the commit as the following to avoid
confusion:
| test: conditionally disable flaky lj-1196

-- 
Best regards,
Sergey Kaplun

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

[Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 200 bytes --]

This definitely better, thanks!

On 7/21/25 15:42, Sergey Kaplun wrote:
> I've rephrased the header of the commit as the following to avoid
> confusion:
> | test: conditionally disable flaky lj-1196
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 616 bytes --]

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

[Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches]

I've applied the patch into all long-term branches in
tarantool/luajit and bumped a new version in Tarantool's master [1],
release/3.4 [2], release/3.3 [3], release/3.2 [4] and release/2.11 [5].

[1]: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/pull/11693
[2]: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/pull/11694
[3]: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/pull/11695
[4]: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/pull/11696
[5]: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/pull/11697

-- 
Best regards,
Sergey Kaplun