Revert "BackgroundAnalysisScope enhancements"#59492
Conversation
|
I suspect the regression could be from this PR. Solution crawler is turned off in RPS, and this PR adds a code path that might have accidentally bypassed the solution crawler option check and hence led to it executing causing the regression. @RikkiGibson I can create a simple PR to fix the above issue instead of reverting the PR. Would it be possible to validate RPS with that and if it still doesn’t fix these regression then revert the entire PR? |
|
Sounds great. Please link to this PR when you create it. Then provide your PRNumber and CommitSHA (not Commit) in this pipeline, and link to the pipeline run in your PR. |
Attempts to fix the RPS regression pointed out in dotnet#59492
|
Thanks @RikkiGibson. Created #59498 to attempt to fix the RPS regression and kicked off the RPS validation PR for it. |
|
Marked as draft as #59498 is preferred. |
|
Heads up that RPS is passing in the validation insertion for this revert. Doesn't change our plan for what to do but helps confirm that the problem is what we think it is. |
|
@RikkiGibson It looks like #59498 also passed RPS, aside from an NGEN issue which is likely unrelated. |
Reverts #57172
This PR is suspected of introducing RPS regressions.
Last known good: https://dev.azure.com/devdiv/DevDiv/_git/VS/pullrequest/379422
First known bad: https://dev.azure.com/devdiv/DevDiv/_git/VS/pullrequest/379438
Revert validation: https://dev.azure.com/devdiv/DevDiv/_git/VS/pullrequest/379561
Regressed counters:
Please advise whether the failures are plausibly connected with this PR, and if so, whether we should revert, or take a follow-up PR to fix, or seek an exception. @genlu @mavasani @CyrusNajmabadi @sharwell.