ci: Temporarily revert “Drop bench -priority-level in win cross CI” #32302

1. 
   maflcko commented at 6:10 am on April 18, 2025: member

   This reverts commit 27f11217ca63e0f8f78f14db139150052dcd9962.

   The commit was nice and useful. However, CI doesn’t pass, see #32291. Temporarily revert it, so that it can be enabled again along with the issue fixed.

2. ci: Temporarily revert "Drop bench -priority-level in win cross CI"

   This reverts commit 27f11217ca63e0f8f78f14db139150052dcd9962.

   fadccd9e4a
3. 
   DrahtBot commented at 6:10 am on April 18, 2025: contributor

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   Code Coverage & Benchmarks

   For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/32302.

   Reviews

   See the guideline for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	l0rinc

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.

   Conflicts

   Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

   • #32306 (ci: Temporarily disable WalletMigration benchmark by hebasto)

   If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

4. DrahtBot added the label Tests on Apr 18, 2025
5. 
   l0rinc commented at 9:14 am on April 18, 2025: contributor

   ACK fadccd9e4ab29fa703dd5a6f42fae030176a86f3

   Build passes now, we will have to rebase a few PRs after this so it makes sense to merge it ASAP.

6. 
   fanquake commented at 9:53 am on April 18, 2025: member

   Can we add a different change, to continue running all benchmarks (I guess just not Windows), so we aren’t back to the same state that allowed #32277 to happen?
7. 
   hebasto commented at 9:48 pm on April 18, 2025: member

   Can we add a different change…

   An alternative has been suggested in #32306.

8. 
   hebasto commented at 10:07 am on April 19, 2025: member

   May this be closed in favour of #32306?
9. 
   l0rinc commented at 10:17 am on April 19, 2025: contributor

   I’ve pushed #32309 which seems to fix the build (based on https://github.com/l0rinc/bitcoin/pull/9)
10. 
    maflcko commented at 11:47 am on April 19, 2025: member

    Can we add a different change, to continue running all benchmarks (I guess just not Windows), so we aren’t back to the same state that allowed #32277 to happen?

    Yes, happy to follow-up next week, as explained in #32288 (review)

    May this be closed in favour of #32306?

    No strong opinion, I think either is equally fine.

    Closing this one for now, because it has less acks.

11. maflcko closed this on Apr 19, 2025

    ---

12. maflcko deleted the branch on Apr 19, 2025
13. hebasto referenced this in commit d91a746815 on Apr 19, 2025

Contributors
maflcko DrahtBot l0rinc fanquake hebasto

Labels
Tests