AaronBallman wrote: > > Me and Aaron are also wondering now how did it pass CI, and what's wrong > > with changes here. I'm sorry @zmodem that we got you involved. > > Just to be clear, my comment wasn't intended as criticism of this patch. This > does seem like a good opportunity to improve our presubmit testing though; > filed #71532 .
Thank you for filing that! I had looked through the precommit CI when accepting the patch and the clang-tools-extra failures appeared to be unrelated and I never saw any other failures reported. It could be that the clang-tools-extra failures managed to hide the clang failures, it could be a Ux issue where I simply missed the clang failures, or it could be an issue where the failures never got reported. (I don't believe it was possible for the Clang CI to be green with those changes as they were.) https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71322 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
