Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] ci: link failure and leak annotations to the test script

From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 5, 2026, 13:23 UTC
Message-ID: <ea988ec0-ef3d-4250-a0d6-ffdf3794b9cf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHwyqnXBLiAA+aX8uLA3UvsfD4zaMTcvj96H8DX8BhMVopwcfQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Harald

On 04/10/2026 12:51, Harald Nordgren wrote:

Show 28 quoted lines

> On Sat, Oct 3, 2026 at 9:02 PM Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If I click on the link [2] it does not take me to that test file though,
>> because it was not changed.
> 
> Yes, unfortunately GitHub won't let us link to a line that was not
> changed in that PR.
> 
>> That makes this somewhat less useful than I
>> initially thought. The current behavior is that when you click on those
>> links in the summary page it takes you to the test output for the job
>> that failed which seems more useful. For example [3] is recent test run
>> that had a leak and clicking on
>>
>>       linux-leaks:(ubuntu-rolling):
>>       failed: t1092.58 submodule handling
>>
>> Takes me to [4] which where I can click to expand the output of the
>> failing test.
>> ...
>> [1] https://github.com/git/git/actions/runs/36537917146?pr=2426
>> [2] https://github.com/git/git/pull/2426/files#annotation_82189987516
>> [3] https://github.com/benknoble/git/actions/runs/36033463504
>> [4]
>> https://github.com/benknoble/git/actions/runs/36033463504/job/107747745741#step:9:5333
> 
> Is this enough to call this a regression? Then maybe it's not worth
> doing this part at all.

Yes, I think we should drop this patch. The first step to debugging a test failure is to look at the test output, so the current behavior where clicking on the links on the summary page takes you to the test output is more useful than taking you to a diff that may not even show the test that failed. The first patch is definitely worth keeping as it makes it much easier to see the LSAN output.

Thanks

Phillip