Skip to content

ci: use builder on windows platforms#1961

Merged
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 7 commits into
mainfrom
julio/use-builder-on-windows
May 21, 2026
Merged

ci: use builder on windows platforms#1961
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 7 commits into
mainfrom
julio/use-builder-on-windows

Conversation

@hoolioh
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@hoolioh hoolioh commented May 8, 2026

What does this PR do?

Switches the Windows release-artifact build over to the shared builder crate, so all platforms (Linux/glibc, Linux/musl, macOS, Windows) now go through the same path. To make that possible:

  • builder/src/arch/windows.rs: adds Windows support to the builder — copies the PDB and the *.dll.lib import library, uses the _ffi-suffixed artifact names produced by the FFI crate, and no-ops the pkg-config step (Windows has no
    pkg-config).
  • builder/src/arch/mod.rs + profiling.rs (refactor: move add_pkg_config to arch): hoists the per-platform add_pkg_config into each arch/*.rs, with the shared file-templating logic exposed as arch::generate_pkg_config. This is
    what lets Windows opt out cleanly instead of carrying a #[cfg] in profiling.rs.
  • builder/src/builder.rs: skips creating bin/ and pkgconfig/ directories on Windows, where they're unused.
  • windows/build-artifacts.ps1: deleted — its responsibilities now live in the builder.
  • CI cleanup (separate commits, batched in because they unblock the Windows-on-builder rollout):
    • cargo nextest run invocations now pass --no-tests=pass so the workflow doesn't fail when a partition/affected-crate set yields zero tests.
    • .github/workflows/test.yml no longer hand-filters builder / test_spawn_from_lib out of the package list — --no-tests=pass makes that filtering unnecessary, and dropping it means the builder crate's own tests are actually
      exercised by CI when it changes.
    • Same fix applied to miri.yml and coverage.yml.

Motivation

We've been maintaining two parallel build pipelines: every other platform goes through the builder crate, while Windows had its own PowerShell script (windows/build-artifacts.ps1) that re-implemented overlapping logic (artifact naming,
output layout, header post-processing). Any change to how artifacts are produced had to be made (and kept in sync) in two places. Routing Windows through the builder consolidates this and lets future build changes ship in one place.

The CI changes are required collateral: once builder is the path used for the Windows release build, the workflow's hard-coded --exclude builder is wrong, and partition-style invocations need --no-tests=pass so the workflow tolerates
empty test sets.

Additional Notes

  • Companion change in libddprof-build: this PR depends on a matching branch in the private libddprof-build repo. The last commit (dfeffd0b4 chore: reference libddprof branch that matches the changes in the builder) temporarily points
    .gitlab-ci.yml's DOWNSTREAM_BRANCH at that branch. This commit must be reverted to main before merge — please flag this in review if I forget.
  • Windows artifact names move from datadog_profiling.{dll,lib,pdb} to datadog_profiling_ffi.{dll,lib,pdb} plus the new datadog_profiling_ffi.dll.lib import library. Downstream consumers that hard-coded the old names will need to follow.
  • No changes to public APIs or to non-Windows artifact layout.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented May 8, 2026

Clippy Allow Annotation Report

Comparing clippy allow annotations between branches:

  • Base Branch: origin/main
  • PR Branch: origin/julio/use-builder-on-windows

Summary by Rule

Rule Base Branch PR Branch Change

Annotation Counts by File

File Base Branch PR Branch Change

Annotation Stats by Crate

Crate Base Branch PR Branch Change
clippy-annotation-reporter 5 5 No change (0%)
datadog-ffe-ffi 1 1 No change (0%)
datadog-ipc 21 21 No change (0%)
datadog-live-debugger 6 6 No change (0%)
datadog-live-debugger-ffi 10 10 No change (0%)
datadog-profiling-replayer 4 4 No change (0%)
datadog-remote-config 3 3 No change (0%)
datadog-sidecar 57 57 No change (0%)
libdd-common 13 13 No change (0%)
libdd-common-ffi 12 12 No change (0%)
libdd-data-pipeline 5 5 No change (0%)
libdd-ddsketch 2 2 No change (0%)
libdd-dogstatsd-client 1 1 No change (0%)
libdd-profiling 13 13 No change (0%)
libdd-telemetry 20 20 No change (0%)
libdd-tinybytes 4 4 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-normalization 2 2 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-obfuscation 3 3 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-stats 1 1 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-utils 15 15 No change (0%)
Total 198 198 No change (0%)

About This Report

This report tracks Clippy allow annotations for specific rules, showing how they've changed in this PR. Decreasing the number of these annotations generally improves code quality.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov-commenter commented May 8, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 54 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 72.83%. Comparing base (7647446) to head (d383f31).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1961      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   72.87%   72.83%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         457      458       +1     
  Lines       75769    75789      +20     
==========================================
- Hits        55220    55204      -16     
- Misses      20549    20585      +36     
Components Coverage Δ
libdd-crashtracker 65.24% <ø> (ø)
libdd-crashtracker-ffi 36.82% <ø> (ø)
libdd-alloc 98.77% <ø> (ø)
libdd-data-pipeline 86.69% <ø> (ø)
libdd-data-pipeline-ffi 78.63% <ø> (ø)
libdd-common 79.81% <ø> (ø)
libdd-common-ffi 74.41% <ø> (ø)
libdd-telemetry 73.34% <ø> (-0.03%) ⬇️
libdd-telemetry-ffi 31.36% <ø> (ø)
libdd-dogstatsd-client 82.64% <ø> (ø)
datadog-ipc 76.17% <ø> (-0.05%) ⬇️
libdd-profiling 81.69% <ø> (ø)
libdd-profiling-ffi 64.79% <ø> (ø)
libdd-sampling 97.46% <ø> (ø)
datadog-sidecar 29.01% <ø> (ø)
datdog-sidecar-ffi 9.29% <ø> (ø)
spawn-worker 48.86% <ø> (ø)
libdd-tinybytes 93.16% <ø> (ø)
libdd-trace-normalization 81.71% <ø> (ø)
libdd-trace-obfuscation 87.30% <ø> (ø)
libdd-trace-protobuf 68.25% <ø> (ø)
libdd-trace-utils 88.86% <ø> (ø)
libdd-tracer-flare 86.88% <ø> (ø)
libdd-log 74.83% <ø> (ø)
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2
Copy link
Copy Markdown

datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2 Bot commented May 8, 2026

Tests

🎉 All green!

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
Patch Coverage: 0.00%
Overall Coverage: 72.84% (-0.04%)

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: d383f31 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

@hoolioh hoolioh force-pushed the julio/use-builder-on-windows branch 2 times, most recently from 9c30399 to f3b0432 Compare May 12, 2026 11:34
@hoolioh hoolioh marked this pull request as ready for review May 12, 2026 11:46
@hoolioh hoolioh requested review from a team as code owners May 12, 2026 11:46
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: dfeffd0b47

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread .gitlab-ci.yml Outdated
@hoolioh hoolioh requested a review from gleocadie May 12, 2026 11:54
@hoolioh hoolioh force-pushed the julio/use-builder-on-windows branch from 4e141e3 to 8a4955f Compare May 13, 2026 09:25
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@gleocadie gleocadie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

overall looks good. The other PR has a comment about enabled features

@dd-octo-sts
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

dd-octo-sts Bot commented May 21, 2026

Artifact Size Benchmark Report

aarch64-alpine-linux-musl
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 7.57 MB 7.57 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 82.01 MB 82.01 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 10.02 MB 10.02 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 98.27 MB 98.27 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
libdatadog-x64-windows
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
libdatadog-x86-windows
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
x86_64-alpine-linux-musl
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 73.11 MB 73.11 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 8.45 MB 8.45 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 90.92 MB 90.92 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 10.08 MB 10.08 MB 0% (0 B) 👌

@hoolioh
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

hoolioh commented May 21, 2026

/merge

@gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351
Copy link
Copy Markdown

gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351 Bot commented May 21, 2026

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-05-21 15:29:49 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge


2026-05-21 15:29:54 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The expected merge time in main is approximately 49m (p90).


2026-05-21 16:24:44 UTCMergeQueue: The checks failed on this merge request

Tests failed on this commit 0a02f45:

What to do next?

  • Investigate the failures and when ready, re-add your pull request to the queue!
  • If your PR checks are green, try to rebase/merge. It might be because the CI run is a bit old.
  • Any question, go check the FAQ.

@hoolioh
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

hoolioh commented May 21, 2026

/merge -c

@gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351
Copy link
Copy Markdown

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-05-21 20:42:53 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge -c
If you need support, contact us on Slack #devflow!


2026-05-21 20:42:55 UTCDevflow: /merge -c

This merge request is not in the queue and can't be unqueued

To get help about command usage, write /merge --help

If you need support, contact us on Slack #devflow with those details!

@hoolioh
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

hoolioh commented May 21, 2026

/merge

@gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351
Copy link
Copy Markdown

gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351 Bot commented May 21, 2026

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-05-21 20:43:16 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge


2026-05-21 20:43:23 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: waiting for PR to be ready

This pull request is not mergeable according to GitHub. Common reasons include pending required checks, missing approvals, or merge conflicts — but it could also be blocked by other repository rules or settings.
It will be added to the queue as soon as checks pass and/or get approvals. View in MergeQueue UI.
Note: if you pushed new commits since the last approval, you may need additional approval.
You can remove it from the waiting list with /remove command.


2026-05-21 21:27:18 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: merge request added to the queue

The expected merge time in main is approximately 51m (p90).


2026-05-21 22:09:03 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: This merge request was merged

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants