Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Fix spurious CI failures - #94779
Conversation
rust-highfive
commented
Mar 9, 2022
(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
Dylan-DPC
commented
Mar 9, 2022
@bors r+ p=50 rollup=never |
bors
commented
Mar 9, 2022
📌 Commit 1c0bd57d4f36f3a5bea74d7ac48c1596153688ed has been approved by |
bors
commented
Mar 9, 2022
🌲 The tree is currently closed for pull requests below priority 50. This pull request will be tested once the tree is reopened. |
bors
commented
Mar 9, 2022
⌛ Testing commit 1c0bd57d4f36f3a5bea74d7ac48c1596153688ed with merge 0ee66f91371c124eeaccf189524f591235d84c26... |
bors
commented
Mar 9, 2022
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
1c0bd57 to
18006a6CompareGuillaumeGomez
commented
Mar 9, 2022
I commented the test and will look into it later. @bors r=Dylan-DPC p=50 rollup=never |
bors
commented
Mar 9, 2022
📌 Commit 18006a6 has been approved by |
bors
commented
Mar 9, 2022
bors
commented
Mar 9, 2022
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
rust-timer
commented
Mar 10, 2022
Finished benchmarking commit (458262b): comparison url. Summary: This benchmark run did not return any relevant results. 4 results were found to be statistically significant but too small to be relevant. If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. @rustbot label: -perf-regression |
This should fix the CI error encountered in #94774 (and multiple others).
cc @nikic