Merged
Conversation
25bc475 to
1cc9e64
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage ? 33.00%
=========================================
Files ? 16
Lines ? 412
Branches ? 243
=========================================
Hits ? 136
Misses ? 49
Partials ? 227 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
8cc759d to
5bebaf8
Compare
a54981a to
cae1495
Compare
180b3cf to
616144e
Compare
a392059 to
da27b1c
Compare
da27b1c to
555e6fb
Compare
368af6d to
9c0b367
Compare
ce4740f to
14e6dca
Compare
14e6dca to
9340619
Compare
c725a34 to
225998f
Compare
1af0827 to
8735fc8
Compare
Signed-off-by: Christophe Bedard <bedard.christophe@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Christophe Bedard <christophe.bedard@apex.ai>
8735fc8 to
824708e
Compare
Member
Author
|
This only affects local CI, so I'll merge this. |
clalancette
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 26, 2024
I believe that g++ does not guarantee what a particular symbol name will be. Thus, in g++ 11.4.0 (what is in Ubuntu 22.04), the symbol name here ended with "#2", while in g++ 13.2.0 (what is in Ubuntu 24.04), the symbol name ends with "#1". Given that we can't guarantee this, just search for the first part of the name up to the number, which should be good enough for this test. Signed-off-by: Chris Lalancette <clalancette@gmail.com>
clalancette
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 26, 2024
* Use a memcmp for the expected symbol name. I believe that g++ does not guarantee what a particular symbol name will be. Thus, in g++ 11.4.0 (what is in Ubuntu 22.04), the symbol name here ended with "#2", while in g++ 13.2.0 (what is in Ubuntu 24.04), the symbol name ends with "#1". Given that we can't guarantee this, just search for the first part of the name up to the number, which should be good enough for this test. Signed-off-by: Chris Lalancette <clalancette@gmail.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR configures a GitHub workflow that matches the existing GitLab CI: https://gitlab.com/ros-tracing/ros2_tracing/-/blob/b695e4e367fb6e250d3147ab6b851b25a0e50299/.gitlab-ci.yml. It builds
ros2_tracingwith/without LTTng and with/without tracing being disabled, and checks if the tracing instrumentation is indeed available (or not).The "sanity checks" workflow makes sure that the tracing instrumentation can be enabled when starting from a default source build or a binary installation, as explained in the build instructions in the README: https://github.com/ros2/ros2_tracing#building. This will also be documented on docs.ros.org, see: ros2/ros2_documentation#2877.