Skip to content
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.

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

Rollup of 15 pull requests #100677

Merged
merged 36 commits into from
Aug 17, 2022
Merged

Rollup of 15 pull requests #100677

merged 36 commits into from
Aug 17, 2022

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

aDotInTheVoid and others added 30 commits July 18, 2022 16:59
Just moving code around so that triagebot can ping relevant parties when
translation logic is modified.

Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Add mention groups to `triagebot.toml` for diagnostic derive macros and
diagnostic translation sources/resources.

Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Instruct triagebot to autolabel pull requests that modify the
translation sources with the `A-translation` label.

Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
By using `expr_str` more and adding `expr_{char,byte_str}`.
- Rename `ast::Lit::token` as `ast::Lit::token_lit`, because its type is
  `token::Lit`, which is not a token. (This has been confusing me for a
  long time.)
  reasonable because we have an `ast::token::Lit` inside an `ast::Lit`.
- Rename `LitKind::{from,to}_lit_token` as
  `LitKind::{from,to}_token_lit`, to match the above change and
  `token::Lit`.
IEEE-754, not IEEE-745. May save someone a second sometime
Quick pull request; IEEE-754, not IEEE-745. May save someone a quick second some time.
…-test-cleanup, r=CraftSpider

Rustdoc json tests: New @hasexact test command

Alot of the time, we wanted to assert that a module had an exact set of items. Most of the time this was done by asserting that the ```@count``` of the module was `n`, and then doing `n` ```@has``` checks on the module.

This was tedious, so often shortcuts were done.

This PR adds a new command to jsondocck to allow consistently expressing this behavior, and then uses it to clean up the tests.

``@rustbot`` modify labels: +A-rustdoc-json +A-testsuite
interpret: only consider 1-ZST when searching for receiver

`repr(transparent)` currently entirely rejects ZST with alignment larger than 1 (which is odd, arguably [this](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=02870f29396fa948c3123cb53d869ad1) should be accepted), so this should be safe. And if it ever isn't safe then that is very likely a bug elsewhere in the compiler.
…trochenkov

Clean up `LitKind`

r? ``@petrochenkov``
…imulacrum

triagebot: add translation-related mention groups

- Move some code around so that triagebot can ping relevant parties when translation logic is modified.
- Add mention groups to triagebot for translation-related files/folders.
- Auto-label pull requests with changes to translation-related files/folders with `A-translation`.

r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
…tion-cycle, r=cjgillot

Do not report cycle error when inferring return type for suggestion

The UI test is a good example of a case where this happens. The cycle is due to needing the value of the return type `-> _` to compute the variances of items in the crate, but then needing the variances of the items in the crate to do typechecking to infer what `-> _`'s real type is.

Since we're already gonna emit an error in astconv, just delay the cycle bug as an error.
`is_knowable` use `Result` instead of `Option`
…acrum

unwind: don't build dependency when building for Miri

This is basically re-submitting rust-lang#94813.

In that PR there was a suggestion to instead have bootstrap set a `RUST_CHECK` env var and use that rather than doing something Miri-specific. However, such an env var would mean that when switching between `./x.py check` and `./x.py build`, the build script gets re-run each time, which doesn't seem good. So I think for now checking for Miri probably causes fewer problems.

r? ````@Mark-Simulacrum````
…KO8Ki

needless separation of impl blocks
Pass +atomics-32 feature for {arm,thumb}v4t-none-eabi

Similar to rust-lang@89582e8, but for ARMv4t.
Pre-v6 ARM target does not have atomic CAS, except for Linux and Android where atomic CAS is provided by compiler-builtins. So, there is a similar issue as thumbv6m.

I have confirmed that enabling the `atomics-32` target feature fixes the problem in the project affected by this issue. (taiki-e/portable-atomic#28 (comment))

Closes rust-lang#100619

r? ``@nikic``
cc ``@Lokathor``
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 17, 2022

📌 Commit 1199dbd has been approved by matthiaskrgr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added the S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. label Aug 17, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 17, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 1199dbd with merge 6146e596b71fc154320e6c37fb645f0fe85184b3...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 17, 2022

💥 Test timed out

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Aug 17, 2022
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors retry

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Aug 17, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 17, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 1199dbd with merge 9c20b2a...

@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 17, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing 9c20b2a to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Aug 17, 2022
@bors bors merged commit 9c20b2a into rust-lang:master Aug 17, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.65.0 milestone Aug 17, 2022
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (9c20b2a): comparison url.

Instruction count

  • Primary benchmarks: ❌ relevant regressions found
  • Secondary benchmarks: ❌ relevant regressions found
mean1 max count2
Regressions ❌
(primary)
0.3% 0.3% 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
1.3% 1.9% 4
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.3% 0.3% 2

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results
  • Primary benchmarks: ❌ relevant regression found
  • Secondary benchmarks: ✅ relevant improvements found
mean1 max count2
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.8% 2.8% 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-3.0% -3.7% 8
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.8% 2.8% 1

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

Footnotes

  1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change 2

  2. number of relevant changes 2

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression Performance regression. label Aug 17, 2022
@lqd
Copy link
Member

lqd commented Aug 17, 2022

Probably this one: @rust-timer build 8203583dca6e7de881b6615120538fea7be69577

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Queued 8203583dca6e7de881b6615120538fea7be69577 with parent 86c6ebe, future comparison URL.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (8203583dca6e7de881b6615120538fea7be69577): comparison url.

Instruction count

  • Primary benchmarks: ❌ relevant regressions found
  • Secondary benchmarks: ❌ relevant regressions found
mean1 max count2
Regressions ❌
(primary)
0.5% 1.0% 8
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
1.7% 2.2% 3
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.5% 1.0% 8

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results
  • Primary benchmarks: ❌ relevant regression found
  • Secondary benchmarks: ✅ relevant improvements found
mean1 max count2
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.1% 2.1% 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.0% 2.0% 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-3.0% -3.4% 7
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.1% 2.1% 1

Cycles

Results
  • Primary benchmarks: ❌ relevant regressions found
  • Secondary benchmarks: no relevant changes found
mean1 max count2
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.5% 3.0% 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.5% 3.0% 2

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

Footnotes

  1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change 2 3

  2. number of relevant changes 2 3

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Aug 17, 2022
@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

Probably this one: @rust-timer build 8203583

indeed, the regressing benchmarks for PR #100652 include the serde, unify-linearly and deep-vector cases that the rollup suffered from, all by similar amounts. (only ucd was absent from the narrower view).

I tagged PR #100652 as a perf regression, and thus will mark this PR as triaged.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label Aug 24, 2022
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr deleted the rollup-au41ho1 branch October 9, 2022 00:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.