Skip to content

[CI][Benchmarks] do not build and run E2E test on benchmark only changes #20414

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

[CI][Benchmarks] do not build and run E2E test on benchmark only changes #20414

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

@lslusarczyk
Copy link
Contributor

@lslusarczyk lslusarczyk commented Oct 21, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Also

  • removed unused &sycl anchor
  • added missing filter names to case when CI has to treat everything as changed for huge PRs.

@lslusarczyk lslusarczyk marked this pull request as ready for review October 23, 2025 12:06
@lslusarczyk lslusarczyk requested a review from a team as a code owner October 23, 2025 12:06
@lslusarczyk lslusarczyk marked this pull request as draft October 24, 2025 04:56
@lslusarczyk lslusarczyk requested a review from Copilot October 24, 2025 06:42
Copilot AI reviewed Oct 24, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

@lslusarczyk lslusarczyk marked this pull request as ready for review October 24, 2025 08:05
@lslusarczyk
Copy link
Contributor Author

@intel/dpcpp-devops-reviewers , please review

@lukaszstolarczuk
Copy link
Contributor

FYI, disabling extra CI jobs, when only benchmark scripts are changed will be removed in: #20439

@lslusarczyk, pls consider removing the first commit

@lslusarczyk
Copy link
Contributor Author

lslusarczyk commented Oct 24, 2025 •
edited
Loading

FYI, disabling extra CI jobs, when only benchmark scripts are changed will be removed in: #20439

This contains also the refactor. I'm ok with reverting my change once @intel/dpcpp-devops-reviewers will accept #20439. Since this change is so minimalist I'd like to have it merged ASAP to not run this long CI right now. Then we have time to work and merge #20493 without hurry.

@lslusarczyk, pls consider removing the first commit

Let's just do merge will with squash joining these two commits.

sarnex
sarnex reviewed Oct 24, 2025
View reviewed changes
.github/workflows/sycl-linux-precommit.yml
toolchain_artifact: sycl_linux_default
e2e_binaries_artifact: e2e_bin
e2e_binaries_preview_artifact: e2e_bin_preview
e2e_binaries_artifact: ${{ contains(needs.detect_changes.outputs.filters, 'nonbench') && 'e2e_bin' || '' }}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i don't really like the detect_changes here, i would prefer benchmarking_only was a boolean param that we could check here, and if this workflow was called with the benchmarking_only var we always skip tests regardless of the file. we could need a seperate workflow call for benchmarking (which we probably already have?)

fyi @intel/dpcpp-devops-reviewers

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is a change made to be as short as possible, to ease your review of its correctness and have CI working faster right now. @lukaszstolarczuk is refactoring benchmarking CI in #20439 There is a separate workflow there so this change (if we go with this patch before #20439) will be reverted.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If your team will commit to addressing my/Andrei's feedback in that PR I'm fine to merge this given it seems important to your team.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes. We are definitely going to implement this in #20439 way reverting my temporary changes.
If you can merge this PR and then do the review of #20439 it would be great.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would want to see if @aelovikov-intel is okay with this as well before merging

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok. I'm also OK with closing this PR without merging if we are able to review @lukaszstolarczuk change soon. @aelovikov-intel, please decide.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We don't touch detect_files workflow frequently enough to be confident that '!devops/scripts/benchmarks/**' does the right thing, so let's focus on the #20439 instead.

@aelovikov-intel
Copy link
Contributor

Have you considered just disabling pre-commit workflows and creating a separate just for benchmarks?

@lslusarczyk
Copy link
Contributor Author

Have you considered just disabling pre-commit workflows and creating a separate just for benchmarks?

I see this is done this way in #20439. I tried to make a very short change to have it working. However if you can look at that bigger patch now/soon, then we can close this PR without merging.

@lslusarczyk
Copy link
Contributor Author

Decided to focus on #20439

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@sarnex sarnex sarnex left review comments

@aelovikov-intel aelovikov-intel aelovikov-intel left review comments

Copilot code review Copilot Copilot left review comments

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@lslusarczyk @lukaszstolarczuk @aelovikov-intel @sarnex