From: "Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ben Knoble <ben.knoble@gmail.com>,
Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>,
Harald Nordgren <haraldnordgren@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5 0/2] ci: link failure and leak annotations to the test script
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2026 08:11:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <pull.2419.v5.git.git.1791015117.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pull.2419.git.git.1790362443893.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Link failure and leak annotations in CI to the test script, so both can be
found from the job summary.
V5 CI Job where failures and leaks are reported:
https://github.com/git/git/actions/runs/36979818141/job/110752027863?pr=2426
Changes in v5:
* Removed % escaping entirely, verified on CI that it isn't needed. Every
existing test description that uses % renders correctly unescaped.
* Rewrote the file/line commit message with a concrete example (failed:
t1060.17 partial clone of corrupted repository).
Changes in v4:
* Clarify commit messages and simplify escaping logic.
Changes in v3:
* Fixed bug in the --immediate exit ordering: the --immediate &&
--invert-exit-code path called exit 0 before the test's annotation was
written, now a single unconditional call covers both exit paths.
* github_escape_message_ no longer relies on \r being a portable sed escape
sequence (not POSIX-guaranteed and BSD sed implementations can differ),
it splices in the literal carriage-return byte via printf instead.
* Reverted unrelated test-tool line back to its original form.
Changes in v2:
* Split into two commits, each explaining its own reasoning.
* Leak output is no longer capped or embedded in the message, it's now an
uncapped fold, so multiple leaks in the same test both show in full. A
second leak in a different test still won't show in the same run,
--immediate stops the script at the first failure, but it no longer gets
buried under every later test falsely reporting "not ok" either.
* Drops the giant unfolded message that annotations used to carry, which is
what probably caused the scrolling behavior.
Harald Nordgren (2):
ci: annotate leaks and stop a leak-sanitizer script at its first
failure
ci: point test failures and fixed known breakages at their file and
line
ci/lib.sh | 1 +
t/test-lib-github-workflow-markup.sh | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
t/test-lib.sh | 6 +++-
3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
base-commit: c46c1e37724f0478939de636ab8ea5a89086d532
Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-git-2419%2FHaraldNordgren%2Fci-annotation-file-line-v5
Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-git-2419/HaraldNordgren/ci-annotation-file-line-v5
Pull-Request: https://github.com/git/git/pull/2419
Range-diff vs v4:
1: 138394b48b = 1: 851efeec8b ci: annotate leaks and stop a leak-sanitizer script at its first failure
2: 8ec2b53d82 ! 2: 46f93a9e16 ci: point test failures and fixed known breakages at their file and line
@@ Metadata
## Commit message ##
ci: point test failures and fixed known breakages at their file and line
- A test failure or a fixed known breakage gets an annotation that names
- the test but says nothing about where it's defined, so a reviewer has
- to search the script by hand to find it.
+ When a test fails, GitHub shows an annotation naming it, for example:
- Find the line a test is defined on by searching the script for its
- description as a fixed string, using the first match. Fall back to
+ failed: t1060.17 partial clone of corrupted repository
+
+ but the location GitHub attaches to that annotation is the CI
+ workflow file itself, not the test script, so there is nothing
+ pointing at where the test actually lives.
+
+ Find the line a test is defined on by searching its script for the
+ test's own description as a fixed string, using the first match, and
+ attach that file and line to the annotation instead. Fall back to
line 1 when the description is not found verbatim, which happens when
a test builds its description at runtime instead of writing it out
literally.
- A GitHub annotation is a single line, so a `%` in a test description
- has to be percent-encoded as `%25`, or GitHub misreads it as its own
- escape sequence. for-each-ref's format atoms use plenty of them, e.g.
- `%(raw)`.
-
Signed-off-by: Harald Nordgren <haraldnordgren@gmail.com>
## t/test-lib-github-workflow-markup.sh ##
@@ t/test-lib-github-workflow-markup.sh: start_test_output () {
github_markup_script_name=${0##*/}
}
-+github_escape_message_ () {
-+ # % has to be escaped or GitHub misreads it as the start of its own
-+ # percent-encoding (e.g. a literal %(raw) in a for-each-ref test
-+ # description).
-+ sed -e 's/%/%25/g'
-+}
-+
+find_test_case_line_ () {
+ # A description can contain characters like [ or * that would
+ # corrupt a regex search, so match it literally and take the first
@@ t/test-lib-github-workflow-markup.sh: github_annotation_ () {
+ esac
+
+ test_case_line=$(find_test_case_line_ "$1")
-+ test_case_description=$(printf '%s' "$1" | github_escape_message_)
+
case "$test_case_result" in
failure)
- echo >>$github_markup_output "::error::failed: $this_test.$test_count $1"
+ github_annotation_ error "t/$github_markup_script_name" "${test_case_line:-1}" \
-+ "failed: $this_test.$test_count $test_case_description"
++ "failed: $this_test.$test_count $1"
;;
fixed)
- echo >>$github_markup_output "::notice::fixed: $this_test.$test_count $1"
@@ t/test-lib-github-workflow-markup.sh: github_annotation_ () {
- # Exit without printing the "ok" or ""broken" tests
- return
+ github_annotation_ notice "t/$github_markup_script_name" "${test_case_line:-1}" \
-+ "fixed: $this_test.$test_count $test_case_description"
++ "fixed: $this_test.$test_count $1"
;;
esac
+
--
gitgitgadget
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-03 8:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-25 18:54 [PATCH] ci: point leak-sanitizer failures at the actual test and error Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-09-25 20:26 ` Ben Knoble
2026-09-25 21:43 ` Harald Nordgren
2026-09-27 15:19 ` Phillip Wood
2026-09-27 19:52 ` Harald Nordgren
2026-09-28 18:54 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] ci: link failure and leak annotations to the test script Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-09-28 18:54 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ci: annotate leaks and stop a leak-sanitizer script at its first failure Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-09-28 20:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-09-29 7:47 ` Harald Nordgren
2026-09-28 18:54 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] ci: point test failures and fixed known breakages at their file and line Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-09-28 20:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-09-30 6:09 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] ci: link failure and leak annotations to the test script Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-09-30 6:09 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] ci: annotate leaks and stop a leak-sanitizer script at its first failure Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-09-30 14:56 ` Phillip Wood
2026-09-30 6:09 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ci: point test failures and fixed known breakages at their file and line Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-09-30 14:56 ` Phillip Wood
2026-09-30 18:40 ` Harald Nordgren
2026-09-30 14:37 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] ci: link failure and leak annotations to the test script Junio C Hamano
2026-09-30 15:52 ` Phillip Wood
2026-09-30 18:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-10-01 18:44 ` [PATCH v4 " Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-10-01 18:44 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] ci: annotate leaks and stop a leak-sanitizer script at its first failure Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-10-01 18:44 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] ci: point test failures and fixed known breakages at their file and line Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-10-01 19:49 ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-01 20:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-10-02 8:04 ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-03 8:11 ` Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget [this message]
2026-10-03 8:11 ` [PATCH v5 1/2] ci: annotate leaks and stop a leak-sanitizer script at its first failure Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-10-03 8:11 ` [PATCH v5 2/2] ci: point test failures and fixed known breakages at their file and line Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-10-03 13:03 ` [PATCH v5 0/2] ci: link failure and leak annotations to the test script Phillip Wood
2026-10-03 19:02 ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-04 11:51 ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-05 13:23 ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-05 13:59 ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-05 15:11 ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-04 12:03 ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-06 6:56 ` [PATCH v6 " Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-10-06 6:56 ` [PATCH v6 1/2] ci: annotate leaks and stop a leak-sanitizer script at its first failure Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-10-06 6:56 ` [PATCH v6 2/2] ci: point test failures and fixed known breakages at their file and line Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-10-06 9:52 ` [PATCH v6 0/2] ci: link failure and leak annotations to the test script Phillip Wood
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=pull.2419.v5.git.git.1791015117.gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--to=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=ben.knoble@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=haraldnordgren@gmail.com \
--cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox