Skip to content

Exclude Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting tests on NAOT and R2R#130066

Open
MichalStrehovsky wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
MichalStrehovsky-patch-1
Open

Exclude Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting tests on NAOT and R2R#130066
MichalStrehovsky wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
MichalStrehovsky-patch-1

Conversation

@MichalStrehovsky

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Added project exclusion for Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting functional tests due to issue #129832.

Added project exclusion for Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting functional tests due to issue #129832.
@dotnet-policy-service

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-extensions-hosting
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Copilot AI 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.

Pull request overview

This PR updates the libraries test traversal project to exclude Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting functional tests from running in specific CI configurations (NativeAOT and ReadyToRun), in response to a tracked failing test scenario.

Changes:

  • Exclude Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting.Functional.Tests.csproj when $(TestNativeAot) is enabled (and disabled-NativeAOT-tests aren’t being forced on).
  • Exclude the same functional test project when $(TestReadyToRun) is enabled.

Comment thread src/libraries/tests.proj
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot Code Review

Holistic Assessment

Motivation: The PR disables a failing functional test suite (Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting.Functional.Tests) for NativeAOT and ReadyToRun test configurations, with a tracking issue (#129832) to investigate and fix the underlying problem. This is a standard pattern for unblocking CI when tests fail in specific configurations.

Approach: The exclusions follow the exact same pattern used throughout tests.proj — a comment linking the tracking issue followed by a <ProjectExclusions> element. The change is placed in the correct <ItemGroup> sections for NativeAOT (line 391, conditioned on TestNativeAot) and ReadyToRun (line 651, conditioned on TestReadyToRun).

Summary: ✅ LGTM. This is a minimal, correctly-placed test exclusion that follows established conventions. The excluded project path is valid, the tracking issue is referenced, and the change is scoped precisely to the two affected test configurations.


Detailed Findings

Detailed Findings

✅ Correctness — Exclusion entries are well-formed

  • The project path Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting/tests/FunctionalTests/Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting.Functional.Tests.csproj is confirmed to exist.
  • Both exclusions correctly use $(MSBuildThisFileDirectory) prefix, consistent with all other entries in this file.
  • The NativeAOT exclusion is inside the '$(TestNativeAot)' == 'true' and '$(RunDisabledNativeAotTests)' != 'true' condition, meaning it can be re-enabled via the override flag for validation.

✅ Convention — Follows established pattern

Both entries include a comment with the GitHub issue URL directly above the exclusion, matching the convention used by every other exclusion in this file (e.g., issues #119380, #108274, #72908, #95928).

✅ Scope — Minimal and focused

The PR changes exactly one file with exactly the entries needed. No unrelated changes.

Note

This review was created by GitHub Copilot.

Note

🔒 Integrity filter blocked 1 item

The following item was blocked because it doesn't meet the GitHub integrity level.

  • #129832 issue_read: has lower integrity than agent requires. The agent cannot read data with integrity below "approved".

To allow these resources, lower min-integrity in your GitHub frontmatter:

tools:
  github:
    min-integrity: approved  # merged | approved | unapproved | none

Generated by Code Review for issue #130066 · ● 8.5M ·

@MichalStrehovsky MichalStrehovsky enabled auto-merge (squash) July 1, 2026 04:18
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