Skip to content

fix: properly guard NoMount steps when disabled - #293

Merged
TheWildJames merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/nomount-disabled-guards
Sep 5, 2026
Merged

TheWildJames merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/nomount-disabled-guards

Conversation

@TheWildJames

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Disabling NoMount (use_nomount=false) still broke the build: nomount_commit is always resolved, so the 'nomount_commit != ...' guards never skip. Integrate NoMount ran anyway, then the metadata step failed resolving the missing NoMount-Metamodule artifact. Gate both on feature_set; N/A nomount fields + relaxed validation when disabled.

nomount_commit is always resolved and passed, so the old
'nomount_commit != ...' guards were always true: Integrate NoMount
ran even with use_nomount=false, and the metadata step then died
resolving the missing NoMount-Metamodule artifact.

Gate Integrate NoMount and the nomount parts of the metadata step
on feature_set instead; emit N/A nomount fields with relaxed
validation when disabled.
Copilot AI lite review requested due to automatic review settings September 5, 2026 21:11
@TheWildJames
TheWildJames merged commit f11bcf9 into main Sep 5, 2026
2 checks passed
@TheWildJames
TheWildJames deleted the fix/nomount-disabled-guards branch September 5, 2026 21:12

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟡 Changes recommended

The workflow introduces uninitialized variables (NOMOUNT_ENABLED, METHOD, NOMOUNT_MODULE_COMMIT) under set -u and may now run the metadata step when SUSFS is disabled, causing build failures.

Once you've addressed the issues Copilot identified, you can request another Copilot review.

Pull request overview

This PR updates the kernel build GitHub Actions workflow to ensure NoMount-related steps are properly skipped when NoMount is not selected, and to allow the “Build-verified only” metadata artifact to be generated without requiring NoMount artifacts/fields.

Changes:

  • Gate “Integrate NoMount” purely on feature_set so it won’t run when NoMount is disabled.
  • Make NoMount metadata fields N/A and skip resolving the NoMount-Metamodule artifact when NoMount is not enabled.
  • Split metadata JSON validation into NoMount-enabled vs NoMount-disabled branches.
File summaries
File Description
.github/workflows/build.yml Adjusts NoMount gating and metadata generation/validation to support NoMount being optional.
Review details

Suppressed comments (1)

.github/workflows/build.yml:633

  • This step later uses $METHOD and $NOMOUNT_MODULE_COMMIT under set -u, but they are not initialized in this script nor exported via $GITHUB_ENV from earlier steps. This will make the metadata step fail with an unbound-variable error, and it can also cause commit mismatches in float mode if inputs.nomount_commit is empty.
        # NoMount is optional: only resolve its artifact when requested.
        # (nomount_commit input is always populated, so feature_set is the
        # only reliable signal for whether NoMount was integrated.)
        NOMOUNT_ENABLED="false"
        if [ "${{ contains(inputs.feature_set, 'NoMount') || inputs.feature_set == 'All' }}" = "true" ]; then
  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 2
  • Review effort level: Lite

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

Comment on lines 621 to 623
- name: Write Build-verified only artifact metadata
if: success() && inputs.root_flavor != '' && inputs.nomount_commit != ''
if: success() && inputs.root_flavor != ''
shell: bash
Comment on lines +555 to +563
if [ "$NOMOUNT_ENABLED" = "true" ]; then
NOMOUNT_SHA="${NOMOUNT_COMMIT:-${{ inputs.nomount_commit }}}"
NOMOUNT_MODULE_COMMIT="${{ inputs.nomount_commit }}"
METHOD="GKI source build with SHA-pinned root implementation, SUSFS, and NoMount"
else
NOMOUNT_SHA="N/A"
NOMOUNT_MODULE_COMMIT="N/A"
METHOD="GKI source build with SHA-pinned root implementation and SUSFS"
fi
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.

2 participants