[ci] Run tests under Valgrind Ubuntu x86

[mcbarton]

Description

Please include a summary of changes, motivation and context for this PR.

Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

Please tick all options which are relevant.

• Bug fix
• New feature
• Added/removed dependencies
• Required documentation updates

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 81.94%. Comparing base (62268e7) to head (569c6c8).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #405   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   81.94%   81.94%           
=======================================
  Files          21       21           
  Lines         853      853           
  Branches       87       87           
=======================================
  Hits          699      699           
  Misses        154      154           

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[mcbarton]

I am not sure what is going wrong with using Valgrind on Ubuntu arm runners in the ci (see https://github.com/compiler-research/xeus-cpp/actions/runs/19150317221/job/54738556792?pr=405 ) . This Valgrind error doesn't occur when I run same command locally (and how I managed to produce the Valgrind suppression file. I don't know how to interpret the suppression files, so unsure if there is anything in there that we don't want to suppress.

[anutosh491]

Why is this PR needed in the first place ?

P.S : Asking as someone who is clueless about Valgrind.

[mcbarton]

Why is this PR needed in the first place ?

P.S : Asking as someone who is clueless about Valgrind.

The truthfull reason as to why I added this to the ci is to be consistent with all of compiler researches other repos, which run the tests under Valgrind. I cannot list the benefits of Valgrind as I am still in the process of teaching myself how to use it effectively. I for example cannot tell you if I am suppressing anything that we shouldn't. @vgvassilev @Vipul-Cariappa or @aaronj0 though may be able to enlighten you as to why its used in all the other repos, and help you with a review (once they have bandwidth).

I have limited this PR to just running the tests under Valgrind for Ubuntu x86, as running the tests under Valgrind on Ubuntu arm caused an illegal instruction error from Valgrind which doesn't happen locally, so possibly a bug with the runner. I consider this PR now ready for review.

[anutosh491]

cc @JohanMabille
what's your take on this ?

Asking cause I lack experience with Valgrind :/

[JohanMabille]

I think Valgrind is a very useful tool for both sanity checks and debugging. I also support the consistency across compiler-research repos.

Regarding the failures, this looks like an unsupported instruction detected by Valgrind. Since the tests run fine, this looks like a Valgrind issue (or the way we use it). I don't see the xeus-cpp-valgrind_arm.supp file used here. IT would be nice to print the value of ${SUPPRESSION_FILE} before invoking Valgrind.

[mcbarton]

I think Valgrind is a very useful tool for both sanity checks and debugging. I also support the consistency across compiler-research repos.

Regarding the failures, this looks like an unsupported instruction detected by Valgrind. Since the tests run fine, this looks like a Valgrind issue (or the way we use it). I don't see the xeus-cpp-valgrind_arm.supp file used here. IT would be nice to print the value of ${SUPPRESSION_FILE} before invoking Valgrind.

@johan There was a Valgrind suppression file for Linux arm, but it got removed due the illegal instruction issue in the ci. Here is what is looks like if your interested https://github.com/mcbarton/xeus-cpp/blob/valgrind-check-2/etc/xeus-cpp-valgrind_arm.supp . The way we are using Valgrind is fine, since I was able to produce this file using the command locally. There is some issue with the runner. I will update ci accordingly so that the suppression file used is hardcoded for now to the x86 file, and remove the reference to the arm suppression file until the issue with the arm runner can be determined.

[mcbarton]

I have now updated the ci to only reference an x86 Valgrind suppression file.