[Incremental, Testing] Implement 7 more removal tests. #702
Conversation
|
@swift-ci please test |
|
@swift-ci please test |
| .readGraph, | ||
| .enablingCrossModule, | ||
| .maySkip("main", "other", "another"), | ||
| .missing("another"), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe I am misreading things, but in this case, "another" is the input for which we removed the swiftdeps file above, right? Should it not then be removedInput instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great catch! Thank you.
| graph.ensureOmits(name: topLevelName) | ||
| if removeInputFromInvocation { | ||
| if afterRestoringBadPriors { | ||
| // FIXME: Fix the driver |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you please add a little bit more detail to this FIXME?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great idea! Adding the following: ```
// If you incrementally compile with a.swift and b.swift,
// at the end, the driver saves a serialized ModuleDependencyGraph
// contains nodes for declarations defined in both files.
// If you then later remove b.swift and recompile, the driver will
// see that a file was removed (via comparisons with the saved `BuildRecord`
// and will delete the saved priors. However, if for some reason the
// saved priors are not deleted, the driver will read saved priors
// containing entries for the deleted file. This test simulates that
// condition by restoring the deleted priors. The driver ought to be fixed
// to cull any entries for removed files from the deserialized priors.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let me know if the above needs anything--thanks!
|
@swift-ci please test |
|
rdar://77998890 |
Tests all combinations of
removeInputFromInvocation,removeSwiftDepsFile, &restoreBadPriors.The last condition simulates a case where a file is removed but somehow the driver does not get to remove the priors, which has entries for the removed file.
For that condition, the test passes but prints out a warning.
A subsequent PR will fix this issue.