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 4 pull requests #117482

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Nov 1, 2023
Merged

Rollup of 4 pull requests #117482

merged 8 commits into from
Nov 1, 2023

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

clarfonthey and others added 8 commits October 13, 2023 02:17
Currently the parts of session initialization that happen within
`rustc_interface` are split between `run_compiler` and `create_session`.
This split isn't necessary and obscures what's happening.

This commit merges the two functions. I think a single longer function
is much clearer than splitting this code across two functions in
different modules, especially when `create_session` has 13 parameters,
and is misnamed (it also creates the codegen backend). The net result is
43 fewer lines of code.
Clean up unchecked_math, separate out unchecked_shifts

Tracking issue: rust-lang#85122

Changes:

1. Remove `const_inherent_unchecked_arith` flag and make const-stability flags the same as the method feature flags. Given the number of other unsafe const fns already stabilised, it makes sense to just stabilise these in const context when they're stabilised.
2. Move `unchecked_shl` and `unchecked_shr` into a separate `unchecked_shifts` flag, since the semantics for them are unclear and they'll likely be stabilised separately as a result.
3. Add an `unchecked_neg` method exclusively to signed integers, under the `unchecked_neg` flag. This is because it's a new API and probably needs some time to marinate before it's stabilised, and while it *would* make sense to have a similar version for unsigned integers since `checked_neg` also exists for those there is absolutely no case where that would be a good idea, IMQHO.

The longer-term goal here is to prepare the `unchecked_math` methods for an FCP and stabilisation since they've existed for a while, their semantics are clear, and people seem in favour of stabilising them.
…h-on-panic, r=TaKO8Ki

Don't emit delayed good-path bugs on panic

This should fix rust-lang#117381, cc ``@RalfJung``

As opposed to delayed bugs, delayed *good path* bugs really don't make sense to show on panics.
…ck-suggestions, r=compiler-errors

Refactor: move suggestion functions from demand to suggestions

follow-up from
rust-lang#116841 (comment)
…li-obk

Inline and remove `create_session`.

Currently the parts of session initialization that happen within `rustc_interface` are split between `run_compiler` and `create_session`. This split isn't necessary and obscures what's happening.

This commit merges the two functions. I think a single longer function is much clearer than splitting this code across two functions in different modules, especially when `create_session` has 13 parameters, and is misnamed (it also creates the codegen backend). The net result is 43 fewer lines of code.

r? ``@oli-obk``
@rustbot rustbot added 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. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Nov 1, 2023
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=4

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 1, 2023

📌 Commit 515fdbf has been approved by matthiaskrgr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@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 Nov 1, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 1, 2023

⌛ Testing commit 515fdbf with merge 11cd1f0...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 1, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing 11cd1f0 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Nov 1, 2023
@bors bors merged commit 11cd1f0 into rust-lang:master Nov 1, 2023
12 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.75.0 milestone Nov 1, 2023
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Message Perf Build Sha
#115626 Clean up unchecked_math, separate out unchecked_shifts 5ce828e647e14bfd6ab189810fa031f193a095d1 (link)
#117397 Don't emit delayed good-path bugs on panic 4fac141992fd89fdce62c38059fc3802b52029c1 (link)
#117401 Refactor: move suggestion functions from demand to suggesti… 659229a45d2e5b4376c20c274d1fb7f230725aeb (link)
#117475 Inline and remove create_session. 57b3c850ce30a217f7d5ca3167ff221f33599fe8 (link)

previous master: d1611e39c4

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (11cd1f0): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

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

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.1% [1.7%, 2.4%] 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
4.5% [4.5%, 4.5%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-1.9% [-1.9%, -1.9%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.1% [1.7%, 2.4%] 2

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-1.9% [-3.0%, -0.8%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 638.061s -> 635.994s (-0.32%)
Artifact size: 304.46 MiB -> 304.49 MiB (0.01%)

bors-ferrocene bot added a commit to ferrocene/ferrocene that referenced this pull request Nov 2, 2023
80: Automated pull from upstream `master` r=tshepang a=github-actions[bot]


This PR pulls the following changes from the upstream repository:

* rust-lang/rust#117498
  * rust-lang/rust#117488
  * rust-lang/rust#117441
  * rust-lang/rust#117373
  * rust-lang/rust#117298
* rust-lang/rust#117029
* rust-lang/rust#117289
* rust-lang/rust#117307
* rust-lang/rust#114208
* rust-lang/rust#117482
  * rust-lang/rust#117475
  * rust-lang/rust#117401
  * rust-lang/rust#117397
  * rust-lang/rust#115626
* rust-lang/rust#117436
* rust-lang/rust#115356
* rust-lang/rust#117422
* rust-lang/rust#116692



Co-authored-by: David CARLIER <devnexen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Taiki Endo <te316e89@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: ltdk <usr@ltdk.xyz>
Co-authored-by: Ryan Mehri <ryan.mehri1@gmail.com>
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr deleted the rollup-doc6jgm branch March 16, 2024 18:19
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. 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. 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.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants