Skip to content

Generate symbols.o for proc-macros too #142641

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bjorn3
Copy link
Member

@bjorn3 bjorn3 commented Jun 17, 2025

To ensure used statics are functioning correctly for proc-macros too.

@rustbot rustbot added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Jun 17, 2025
@bjorn3 bjorn3 added A-proc-macros Area: Procedural macros F-used_with_arg `#![feature(used_with_arg)]` labels Jun 17, 2025
@bjorn3 bjorn3 force-pushed the proc_macro_symbols_o branch from 8d4e4ef to 3d5a656 Compare June 18, 2025 07:55
@rustbot rustbot added the A-run-make Area: port run-make Makefiles to rmake.rs label Jun 18, 2025
@bjorn3 bjorn3 marked this pull request as ready for review June 18, 2025 07:56
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jun 18, 2025

jieyouxu is not on the review rotation at the moment.
They may take a while to respond.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jun 18, 2025

r? @jieyouxu

rustbot has assigned @jieyouxu.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jun 18, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jun 18, 2025

This PR modifies run-make tests.

cc @jieyouxu

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_ssa

cc @WaffleLapkin

Copy link
Member

@jieyouxu jieyouxu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks

@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 18, 2025

📌 Commit 3d5a656 has been approved by jieyouxu

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 Jun 18, 2025
@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

Actually, can you add a ignore-cross-compile? This can be a host-only test, right? (Context: we're trying to fix run-make to cross-by-default.)
@bors r-

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jun 18, 2025
@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

(r=me after)

@bjorn3
Copy link
Member Author

bjorn3 commented Jun 18, 2025

If run_make_support implicitly adds --target when cross-testing, I would expect it to work just fine when cross-testing. It doesn't run the proc-macro, only checks that the linker doesn't discard the symbol.

@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

Hm right. I'll revisit the directives, but no need to block this PR on that.

@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 18, 2025

📌 Commit 3d5a656 has been approved by jieyouxu

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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jun 18, 2025
@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

Actually, since this is not in a rollup yet, I'd like to try land #139244 first (that has been a long-standing problem). I think this might still need sth like

//@ needs-target-std
//@ needs-crate-type: proc-macro

after #139244, test-various will cause us to try to produce cross-compiled artifacts for wasm tagrets.

@bors r-

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jun 18, 2025
To ensure used statics are functioning correctly for proc-macros too.
@bjorn3 bjorn3 force-pushed the proc_macro_symbols_o branch from 3d5a656 to bd2dd25 Compare June 19, 2025 10:34
@bjorn3
Copy link
Member Author

bjorn3 commented Jun 19, 2025

Added those test directives.

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jun 19, 2025
Copy link
Member

@jieyouxu jieyouxu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks

@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 19, 2025

📌 Commit bd2dd25 has been approved by jieyouxu

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 Jun 19, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-proc-macros Area: Procedural macros A-run-make Area: port run-make Makefiles to rmake.rs F-used_with_arg `#![feature(used_with_arg)]` 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.

4 participants