Skip to content

[Incremental Builds][Explicit Module Builds] Switch to using incremental dependency scanning #1786

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 11, 2025

Conversation

artemcm
Copy link
Contributor

@artemcm artemcm commented Jan 28, 2025

For Explicit Module Builds, have the driver configure the dependency scanner invocation to serialize its internal scanner cache state after a scan, and attempt to deserialize a prior build's scanner cache state, and validate its contents for an incremental re-scan.

Using functionality implemented in: swiftlang/swift#78962

@nkcsgexi
Copy link
Contributor

@swift-ci please test

@artemcm
Copy link
Contributor Author

artemcm commented Jan 30, 2025

I think this PR will need the compiler change to land in a nightly snapshot first, in order to pass the tests.

@artemcm artemcm force-pushed the IncrementalExplicitBuildDepScan branch from 9e366d4 to 942f8f1 Compare January 30, 2025 20:33
@cachemeifyoucan
Copy link
Contributor

I think this PR will need the compiler change to land in a nightly snapshot first, in order to pass the tests.

Shouldn't swift-driver tests work with/without swift compiler changes? It needs to handle both cases otherwise it is going to be a trouble for standalone development.

@artemcm artemcm force-pushed the IncrementalExplicitBuildDepScan branch from 942f8f1 to b700c78 Compare February 7, 2025 21:24
@artemcm
Copy link
Contributor Author

artemcm commented Feb 7, 2025

@swift-ci test

@artemcm
Copy link
Contributor Author

artemcm commented Feb 7, 2025

Shouldn't swift-driver tests work with/without swift compiler changes? It needs to handle both cases otherwise it is going to be a trouble for standalone development.

We often evolve the driver in-sync with the compiler and make inter-dependent changes between the two. The driver is tested against the current development snapshot compiler, and maintaining test compatibility with much older toolchains would be a large burden here that is not worthwhile, in my opinion. Standalone development works quite well with the same snapshot toolchains as are used in CI here.

@artemcm artemcm force-pushed the IncrementalExplicitBuildDepScan branch from b700c78 to 8e9dce2 Compare February 7, 2025 21:33
@artemcm
Copy link
Contributor Author

artemcm commented Feb 7, 2025

@swift-ci test

@artemcm
Copy link
Contributor Author

artemcm commented Feb 10, 2025

@swift-ci test Windows platform

Copy link
Contributor

@cachemeifyoucan cachemeifyoucan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM function wise.

…tal dependency scanning

For Explicit Module Builds, have the driver configure the dependency scanner invocation to serialize its internal scanner cache state after a scan, and attempt to deserialize a prior build's scanner cache state, and validate its contents for an incremental re-scan.
@artemcm artemcm force-pushed the IncrementalExplicitBuildDepScan branch from 8e9dce2 to 5e6a55d Compare February 10, 2025 21:46
@artemcm
Copy link
Contributor Author

artemcm commented Feb 10, 2025

@swift-ci test

@artemcm
Copy link
Contributor Author

artemcm commented Feb 10, 2025

@swift-ci test Windows platform

@artemcm artemcm enabled auto-merge (rebase) February 10, 2025 21:46
@artemcm
Copy link
Contributor Author

artemcm commented Feb 10, 2025

@swift-ci test Windows platform

@artemcm artemcm merged commit 90ddf76 into swiftlang:main Feb 11, 2025
3 checks passed
@artemcm artemcm deleted the IncrementalExplicitBuildDepScan branch February 11, 2025 17:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants