ci: use LLVM 23 in *san, fuzz, *cross jobs #36100

1. 
   fanquake commented at 1:53 PM on August 27, 2026: member

   LLVM 23.1.0 was recently released, switch to using it across sanitizer, fuzzer and cross-compilation jobs.

2. DrahtBot added the label Tests on Aug 27, 2026
3. 
   DrahtBot commented at 1:53 PM on August 27, 2026: contributor

   <!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->

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

   <!--006a51241073e994b41acfe9ec718e94-->

   Code Coverage & Benchmarks

   For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/36100.

   <!--021abf342d371248e50ceaed478a90ca-->

   Reviews

   See the guideline and AI policy for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	hebasto, willcl-ark
   Concept ACK	l0rinc

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please copy-paste <code>&lt;!--meta-tag:bot-skip--&gt;</code> into the comment that the bot should ignore.

   <!--174a7506f384e20aa4161008e828411d-->

   Conflicts

   Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

   • #36147 (ci: add [free|open|net]BSD ci test jobs by willcl-ark)

   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.

   <!--5faf32d7da4f0f540f40219e4f7537a3-->

4. 
   hebasto commented at 2:05 PM on August 27, 2026: member

   Concept ACK. When running the "tidy" job locally, I can see new warnings though. Let's wait for the CI.

5. DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Aug 27, 2026
6. 
   DrahtBot commented at 3:39 PM on August 27, 2026: contributor

   <!--85328a0da195eb286784d51f73fa0af9-->

   🚧 At least one of the CI tasks failed. _{Task tidy: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/33079209989/job/98541478471} _{LLM reason (✨ experimental): CI failed because clang-tidy reported performance warnings (e.g., prefer single-char overload / use std::move) that were treated as errors (-warnings-as-errors).}

   <details><summary>Hints</summary>

   Try to run the tests locally, according to the documentation. However, a CI failure may still happen due to a number of reasons, for example:

   • Possibly due to a silent merge conflict (the changes in this pull request being incompatible with the current code in the target branch). If so, make sure to rebase on the latest commit of the target branch.

   • A sanitizer issue, which can only be found by compiling with the sanitizer and running the affected test.

   • An intermittent issue.

   Leave a comment here, if you need help tracking down a confusing failure.

   </details>

7. 
   l0rinc commented at 4:20 PM on August 27, 2026: contributor

   Concept ACK

8. fanquake force-pushed on Aug 27, 2026
9. DrahtBot removed the label CI failed on Aug 27, 2026
10. fanquake force-pushed on Sep 1, 2026
11. fanquake marked this as ready for review on Sep 1, 2026
12. DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Sep 1, 2026
13. DrahtBot removed the label CI failed on Sep 1, 2026
14. in ci/test/01_base_install.sh:71 in e28020ab30 outdated

      66 | @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ if [ -n "$PIP_PACKAGES" ]; then
      67 |  fi
      68 |  
      69 |  if [[ -n "${USE_INSTRUMENTED_LIBCPP}" ]]; then
      70 | -  ${CI_RETRY_EXE} git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project -b "llvmorg-22.1.7" /llvm-project
      71 | +  ${CI_RETRY_EXE} git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project -b "llvmorg-23.1.0" /llvm-project
      72 |  
    

    ---

    ---

    

    maflcko commented at 4:24 PM on September 1, 2026:

    The tests aren't run, so can probably disable them?

    diff --git a/ci/test/01_base_install.sh b/ci/test/01_base_install.sh
    index a956706..189b244 100755
    --- a/ci/test/01_base_install.sh
    +++ b/ci/test/01_base_install.sh
    @@ -82,2 +82,3 @@ if [[ -n "${USE_INSTRUMENTED_LIBCPP}" ]]; then
         -DLLVM_ENABLE_PER_TARGET_RUNTIME_DIR=OFF \
    +    -DLIBCXX_INCLUDE_TESTS=OFF \
         -DLIBCXXABI_USE_LLVM_UNWINDER=OFF \
    
    

    ---

    

    fanquake commented at 4:40 PM on September 1, 2026:

    Added.

15. in src/.clang-tidy:33 in e28020ab30 outdated

      28 |  -performance-no-int-to-ptr,
      29 |  -performance-noexcept-move-constructor,
      30 | +-performance-prefer-single-char-overloads,
      31 | +-performance-string-view-conversions,
      32 |  -performance-unnecessary-value-param,
      33 | +-performance-use-std-move,
    

    ---

    ---

    

    maflcko commented at 4:26 PM on September 1, 2026:

    Could probably enable them one-by-one on a case-by-case basis in the future.

    ---

    

    fanquake commented at 10:09 AM on September 3, 2026:

    Yea. Some of these are going to touch a fair bit of code, so seems fine to enable later, and not generally block upgrading all the infra.

16. maflcko approved
17. 
    maflcko commented at 4:27 PM on September 1, 2026: member

    Seems fine

18. ci: use LLVM 23 in *san, fuzz, *cross jobs b4bd12d3d5
19. clang-tidy: remove some performance-* options feb3bd46e4
20. ci: pass LIBCXX_INCLUDE_TESTS=OFF to LLVM build 5ba9af6b69
21. fanquake force-pushed on Sep 3, 2026
22. fanquake requested review from willcl-ark on Sep 3, 2026
23. hebasto approved
24. 
    hebasto commented at 10:17 AM on September 3, 2026: member

    ACK 5ba9af6b6922c48567c0db5c7c03febb643b29d1, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK.

25. DrahtBot requested review from l0rinc on Sep 3, 2026
26. willcl-ark approved
27. 
    willcl-ark commented at 10:57 AM on September 3, 2026: member

    ACK 5ba9af6b6922c48567c0db5c7c03febb643b29d1

    Seems fine to drop the 4 performance checks . performance-use-std-move and performance-string-view-conversions from the docs look like they could take some extra review before applying.

28. hebasto merged this on Sep 3, 2026
29. hebasto closed this on Sep 3, 2026

    ---

30. fanquake deleted the branch on Sep 3, 2026

Contributors

fanquakeDrahtBothebastol0rincmaflckowillcl-ark

Review Requested
l0rinc