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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

rustc: Leak the LLVM module and context. #3552 #7659

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

rustc: Leak the LLVM module and context. #3552 #7659

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

brson
Copy link
Contributor

@brson brson commented Jul 9, 2013

During normal batch operation, rustc will not bother to dispose of the LLVM module and context in order to save some time.

before

time: 9.696 s   translation
time: 37.966 s  LLVM passes
time: 0.302 s   linking

real    1m4.415s
user    1m3.528s
sys     0m0.788s

after

time: 9.759 s   translation
time: 35.625 s  LLVM passes
time: 0.308 s   linking

real    1m3.528s
user    1m2.468s
sys     0m0.968s

@sanxiyn
Copy link
Member

sanxiyn commented Jul 10, 2013

Bot failure is Valgrind complaining LLVM module and context are leaked. Duh...

@emberian
Copy link
Member

emberian commented Aug 5, 2013

@brson is there a way to silence valgrind?

@emberian emberian mentioned this pull request Aug 5, 2013
Closed
@sanxiyn
Copy link
Member

sanxiyn commented Aug 6, 2013

@cmr Valgrind can be silenced by adding new supressions to src/etc/*.supp files.

@brson
Copy link
Contributor Author

brson commented Aug 23, 2013

It's only a subset of the tests where valgrind is actually valgrinding rustc. I'll investigate. Trying to revive this patch.

@brson brson closed this Sep 9, 2013
@brson
Copy link
Contributor Author

brson commented Sep 9, 2013

Not going to finish this.

flip1995 pushed a commit to flip1995/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 28, 2021
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#7690 - Jarcho:while_loop_by_ref, r=xFrednet
871ad80 
Change `while_let_on_iterator` suggestion to use `by_ref()`

It came up in the discussion rust-lang#7659 that suggesting `iter.by_ref()` is a clearer suggestion than `&mut iter`. I personally think they're equivalent, but if `by_ref()` is clearer to people then that should be the suggestion.

changelog: Change `while_let_on_iterator` suggestion when using `&mut` to use `by_ref()`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@brson @sanxiyn @emberian