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 #133079

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Nov 15, 2024
Merged

Rollup of 4 pull requests #133079

merged 11 commits into from
Nov 15, 2024

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

compiler-errors and others added 11 commits November 11, 2024 20:53
They each have a single callsite, and the result is always unwrapped, so
the `Option<Annotatable>` return type is misleading.

Also, the comment at the `configure_annotatable` call site is wrong,
talking about a result vector, so this commit also removes that.
Important: we know from the `parse_annotatable_with` call above the call
site that only some of the `Annotatable` variants are possible. The
remaining cases can be replaced with `unreachable!`.
There are two matches: one in a closure, and one vanilla one. They can
be combined and simplified by putting them in a `try` block.
Extend the test for pac-ret with clang and LTO by checking that
different branch protection flags are preserved after the LTO step.
There was an issue in older LLVM versions that was causing this to
behave incorrectly.

Tests the LLVM behaviour added in:
llvm/llvm-project@1782810
…tures-apit, r=BoxyUwU

Recurse into APITs in `impl_trait_overcaptures`

We were previously not detecting cases where an RPIT was located in the return type of an async function, leading to underfiring of the `impl_trait_overcaptures`. This PR does this recursion properly now.

cc rust-lang#132809
…otatable, r=petrochenkov

Refactor `configure_annotatable`

This PR streamlines `configure_annotatable` and nearby code considerably.

r? `@petrochenkov`
…ag-merge, r=jieyouxu

tests: Test pac-ret flag merging on clang with LTO

Extend the test for pac-ret with clang and LTO by checking that different branch protection flags are preserved after the LTO step. There was an issue in older LLVM versions that was causing this to behave incorrectly.

try-job: aarch64-gnu-debug
…g_arg, r=compiler-errors

Change Visitor::visit_precise_capturing_arg so it returns a Visitor::Result

r? `@petrochenkov`

related to rust-lang#128974
@rustbot rustbot added A-run-make Area: port run-make Makefiles to rmake.rs 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. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Nov 15, 2024
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=4

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 15, 2024

📌 Commit a111716 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 15, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 15, 2024

⌛ Testing commit a111716 with merge 917a50a...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 15, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing 917a50a to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Nov 15, 2024
@bors bors merged commit 917a50a into rust-lang:master Nov 15, 2024
7 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.84.0 milestone Nov 15, 2024
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Message Perf Build Sha
#132817 Recurse into APITs in impl_trait_overcaptures 666fe86a05f353ac1341dd028ecdd4755f67dd16 (link)
#133021 Refactor configure_annotatable 9cd3ea5c755d0fa84446694d30172987eca36402 (link)
#133045 tests: Test pac-ret flag merging on clang with LTO 065995f3628a7861054c261e8783498cc148495f (link)
#133049 Change Visitor::visit_precise_capturing_arg so it returns a… c12cb20b201202e1db2c175e791bae36dfb46eb0 (link)

previous master: ce40196577

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 (917a50a): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.1% [0.1%, 0.1%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.6%)

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)
-2.6% [-2.6%, -2.6%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -2.6% [-2.6%, -2.6%] 1

Cycles

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

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 786.906s -> 788.599s (0.22%)
Artifact size: 335.30 MiB -> 335.45 MiB (0.05%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-run-make Area: port run-make Makefiles to rmake.rs 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.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants