Skip to content

[SPARK-35672][FOLLOWUP][TESTS] Add more exclusion rules to MimaExcludes.scala for Scala 2.13 #34664

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
sarutak wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

[SPARK-35672][FOLLOWUP][TESTS] Add more exclusion rules to MimaExcludes.scala for Scala 2.13 #34664

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 3 additions & 1 deletion project/MimaExcludes.scala
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -37,8 +37,10 @@ object MimaExcludes {
// Exclude rules for 3.3.x from 3.2.0
lazy val v33excludes = v32excludes ++ Seq(
// [SPARK-35672][CORE][YARN] Pass user classpath entries to executors using config instead of command line
// This is necessary for Scala 2.13.
// The followings are necessary for Scala 2.13.
ProblemFilters.exclude[DirectMissingMethodProblem]("org.apache.spark.executor.CoarseGrainedExecutorBackend#Arguments.*"),
ProblemFilters.exclude[IncompatibleResultTypeProblem]("org.apache.spark.executor.CoarseGrainedExecutorBackend#Arguments.*"),
ProblemFilters.exclude[MissingTypesProblem]("org.apache.spark.executor.CoarseGrainedExecutorBackend$Arguments$")
Copy link
Member

@dongjoon-hyun dongjoon-hyun Nov 19, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does this also come from SPARK-35672?

Copy link
Member Author

@sarutak sarutak Nov 19, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, I think so.The parameter list of the case class Arguments was changed (userClassPath was removed) in SPARK-35672, which caused the class hierarchy of the class $Arguments$.

$ javap core/target/scala-2.13/classes/org/apache/spark/executor/CoarseGrainedExecutorBackend\$Arguments\$.class 
Compiled from "CoarseGrainedExecutorBackend.scala"
public class org.apache.spark.executor.CoarseGrainedExecutorBackend$Arguments$ extends scala.runtime.AbstractFunction9<java.lang.String, java.lang.String, java.lang.String, java.lang.String, java.lang.Object, java.lang.String, scala.Option<java.lang.String>, scala.Option<java.lang.String>, java.lang.Object, org.apache.spark.executor.CoarseGrainedExecutorBackend$Arguments> implements java.io.Serializable {

)

// Exclude rules for 3.2.x from 3.1.1
Expand Down