Skip to content

bump rust toolchain to 1.85.1#1026

Merged
Xynnn007 merged 2 commits into
confidential-containers:mainfrom
mythi:rust-185
Jun 18, 2025
Merged

bump rust toolchain to 1.85.1#1026
Xynnn007 merged 2 commits into
confidential-containers:mainfrom
mythi:rust-185

Conversation

@mythi

@mythi mythi commented Jun 13, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Change how rust is configured an used in our CI. The changes are:

  • bump the toolchain version pinning from 1.80.0 to 1.85.1
  • move to use actions-rust-lang toolchain action since actions-rs is no
    longer maintained
  • drop 'stable' from CI test matrix since it's a moving target and sometimes
    makes CI to fail in case a new stable rust version adds new linter checks
    that fail with our code. This should move to nighly clippy check or similar.

Update: add another commit that adds a weekly check for cargo clippy using rust stable.

@mythi
mythi force-pushed the rust-185 branch 2 times, most recently from 9fd6729 to a3d60cc Compare June 16, 2025 07:21
@mythi mythi changed the title WIP: bump rust toolchain to 1.85.1 bump rust toolchain to 1.85.1 Jun 16, 2025
@mythi
mythi marked this pull request as ready for review June 16, 2025 07:22
@mythi
mythi requested a review from a team as a code owner June 16, 2025 07:22
@mythi

mythi commented Jun 16, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Ready for review.

@Xynnn007 Xynnn007 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.

Thanks. All look good. Only I think we can drop stable and introduce nightly in a same PR/commit. Otherwise, there is no CI for stable, which leads to the accumulation of many potential lint errors.

@mkulke mkulke left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I found the broken stable build signal to be useful (more useful than beta & nightly), since you have to deal with those changes anyway eventually. We can maybe make the passing of a stable build not required for PR merges?

Comment thread .github/workflows/aa_cc_kbc.yml Outdated
Comment thread .github/workflows/aa_cc_kbc.yml
@mythi

mythi commented Jun 16, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Only I think we can drop stable and introduce nightly in a same PR/commit.

I'll see if I can get some simple cargo clippy check added in this PR.

@mythi
mythi force-pushed the rust-185 branch 2 times, most recently from 6c87bf3 to 220968a Compare June 17, 2025 10:00
Comment thread .github/workflows/ocicrypt_rs_build.yml Outdated
mythi added 2 commits June 17, 2025 15:54
Change how rust is configured an used in our CI. The changes are:

* bump the toolchain version pinning from 1.80.0 to 1.85.1
* move to use actions-rust-lang toolchain action since actions-rs is no
  longer maintained
* drop 'stable' from CI test matrix since it's a moving target and sometimes
  makes CI to fail in case a new stable rust version adds new linter checks
  that fail with our code. This should move to nighly clippy check or similar.

Signed-off-by: Mikko Ylinen <mikko.ylinen@intel.com>
Rust stable releases often add new lint checks that make
guest-components packages to fail CI (we run with -D warnings).

To avoid failing CI blocking PRs because rust stable CI checks won't
pass, we pin to a fixed toolcain version.

However, at the same time we want to be sure the code passes stable
lint checks. Add a weekly non-blocking check using Rust stable to
give us an indication if the code needs to be improved to comply with
the latest stable lint checks.

Signed-off-by: Mikko Ylinen <mikko.ylinen@intel.com>

@fitzthum fitzthum 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

@Xynnn007
Xynnn007 merged commit 22cb293 into confidential-containers:main Jun 18, 2025
30 of 31 checks passed
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.

4 participants