Skip to content

Add x86_64 CentOS Stream 10 workers and builders - #797

Merged
vstinner merged 1 commit into
python:mainfrom
stratakis:x86_64_c10s
Sep 18, 2026
Merged

vstinner merged 1 commit into
python:mainfrom
stratakis:x86_64_c10s

Conversation

@stratakis

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

Comment thread master/custom/builders.py
("AMD64 CentOS10", "cstratak-CentOS10-x86_64", CentOS10Build),
("AMD64 CentOS10 Refleaks", "cstratak-CentOS10-x86_64", UnixRefleakBuild),
("AMD64 CentOS10 LTO", "cstratak-CentOS10-x86_64", LTONonDebugUnixBuild),
("AMD64 CentOS10 LTO + PGO", "cstratak-CentOS10-x86_64", LTOPGONonDebugBuild),

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I noticed that Fedora, CentOS, RHEL workers always use LTO. See for example "aarch64 CentOS10 3.x":
https://buildbot.python.org/#/builders/2168/builds/806. The test output says "== Python build: debug shared LTO valgrind dtrace": notice "LTO".

I'm not sure that it's useful to duplicate have "CentOS" and "CentOS LTO", it's redundant, no?

This remarks is for all Fedora, CentOS and RHEL machines, not only these new works.

I suggest to only keep "CentOS LTO" and remove ""CentOS", so it's more explicit that LTO is used.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

They share LTO but they are different builds. aarch64 CentOS10 is CentOS10Build, the Fedora/RHEL spec configuration (--with-pydebug --enable-shared --with-valgrind --with-system-libmpdec --with-system-expat etc). aarch64 CentOS10 LTO is LTONonDebugUnixBuild, a vanilla release build whose only flag is --with-lto.

So the base builder is the debug, RPM-like one and the LTO builder is really the non-debug one.

But yeah the LTO suffix is not a good name for both. Maybe Non-Debug would be better

I'm planning to actually go through all my workers and builders and verify disrepancies like that but it's a bigger change to cram into this PR.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh ok, it's more subtle than what I expected. In that case, it makes sense to have two builders.

@vstinner vstinner left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@vstinner
vstinner merged commit 662a9e3 into python:main Sep 18, 2026
1 check passed
@stratakis
stratakis deleted the x86_64_c10s branch September 18, 2026 17:13
@vstinner

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I checked the buildbot: it's up and running!

AMD64 CentOS10 3.x: pass successfully, build in 1min 28 sec, tests in 17 min 30 sec. https://buildbot.python.org/#/builders/2297/builds/19

AMD64 CentOS10 Refleaks 3.x: test_long_task_name_is_truncated() fails: https://buildbot.python.org/#/builders/2351/builds/8

FAIL: test_long_task_name_is_truncated (test.test_external_inspection.TestSelfStackTrace.test_long_task_name_is_truncated)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/cstratak-CentOS10-x86_64/3.x.cstratak-CentOS10-x86_64.refleak/build/Lib/test/test_external_inspection.py", line 457, in test_long_task_name_is_truncated
    self.assertIn("Task-1", names)
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
AssertionError: 'Task-1' not found in ['Task-4', 'xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx']

AMD64 CentOS10 FIPS Only Blake2 Builtin Hash 3.x: test_dtrace fails: https://buildbot.python.org/#/builders/2350/builds/18

Warning -- test_dtrace leaked temporary files (4): GMfifo1004780, GMfifo1005305, stap1gsNFh, stap5qWDET

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants