Switch stamping detection to ctx.configuration.stamp_binaries()#3816
Merged
krasimirgg merged 6 commits intobazelbuild:mainfrom Jan 26, 2026
Merged
Switch stamping detection to ctx.configuration.stamp_binaries()#3816krasimirgg merged 6 commits intobazelbuild:mainfrom
krasimirgg merged 6 commits intobazelbuild:mainfrom
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks! How do we go about importing this to google3? Is there a schedule or do we have to do it manually? |
Collaborator
Let's sync internally. |
This was referenced Jan 28, 2026
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 29, 2026
Rules that don't have a `stamp` attribute, for example `rust_cc_proto_library_aspect`, should not be treated as stamped. This was broken by #3816 - prior to that, we were returning false because they also don't have a `_stamp_flag ` attribute. By returning true for `rust_cc_proto_library_aspect`, we're unnecessarily including the volatile stamp files as action inputs, which harms build caching. --------- Co-authored-by: Krasimir Georgiev <krasimir@google.com>
jason-rl
pushed a commit
to runloopai/rules_rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 4, 2026
…3829) Rules that don't have a `stamp` attribute, for example `rust_cc_proto_library_aspect`, should not be treated as stamped. This was broken by bazelbuild#3816 - prior to that, we were returning false because they also don't have a `_stamp_flag ` attribute. By returning true for `rust_cc_proto_library_aspect`, we're unnecessarily including the volatile stamp files as action inputs, which harms build caching. --------- Co-authored-by: Krasimir Georgiev <krasimir@google.com>
dzbarsky
added a commit
to dzbarsky/rules_rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 7, 2026
…() (bazelbuild#3816)" This reverts commit 9586468.
dzbarsky
added a commit
to dzbarsky/rules_rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2026
…() (bazelbuild#3816)" This reverts commit 9586468.
dzbarsky
added a commit
to dzbarsky/rules_rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 18, 2026
…() (bazelbuild#3816)" This reverts commit 9586468.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently, rules_rust uses a
config_settingthat matches--stamp=1to detect whether the--stampoption is enabled in the current configuration. This PR removes theconfig_settingin favor of callingctx.configuration.stamp_binaries(), which is restricted, but available to rules rust because it is on the restricted starlark API allowlist: https://cs.opensource.google/bazel/bazel/+/master:src/main/java/com/google/devtools/build/lib/packages/BuiltinRestriction.java;l=73;drc=135a03ba5dbad5a1a26ef3bde9815ea244a093d7.The motivation for making this change is to improve Google-internal detection of stamped actions for cross-user caching eligibility. The
ctx.configuration.stamp_binaries()call is limited to the case ofstamp = -1, whereas theconfig_settingdependency was unconditional. Notably, forrust_libraryrules with the default attribute ofstamp = 0, we are now able to certify that the rule is not affected by the--stampflag value.Google-internal bug number: 419546090