Rollup of 7 pull requests #84691
Closed
Rollup of 7 pull requests #84691
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Otherwise the test is useless and does nothing. This caught 2 bugs in the test suite.
This is necessary for options that should invalidate the incremental hash but *not* affect the crate hash (e.g. --remap-path-prefix). This doesn't add `for_crate_hash` to the trait directly because it's not relevant for *types*, only for *options*, which are fields on a larger struct. Instead, it adds a new `SUBSTRUCT` directive for options, which does take a `for_crate_hash` parameter. - Use TRACKED_NO_CRATE_HASH for --remap-path-prefix - Add test that `remap_path_prefix` is tracked - Reduce duplication in the test suite to avoid future churn
This also adds support for doc-comments to Options.
This makes the comments show up in the generated docs.
This fixes the temporary regression introduced in rust-lang#84339 where the wasm target uses `fpto{s,u}i` intrinsics but the codegen for those intrinsics with the `+nontrapping-fptoint` LLVM feature wasn't very good (aka it didn't use the wasm instruction). The fixes brought in here fix that and also implement the second-to-last simd instruction in LLVM.
…woerister Add TRACKED_NO_CRATE_HASH and use it for `--remap-path-prefix` I verified locally that this fixes rust-lang#66955. r? ``@Aaron1011`` (feel free to reassign)
Use flex more consistently Builds on rust-lang#84376, related to rust-lang#84354. - Fully replaces `float: right` with `flex` on `.content .out-of-band`. - Uses `flex` more consistently with existing usage (on `h3`, `h4`, etc.). Tested on various widths to make sure the pages behave as before.
Vastly improves coverage spans for macros Fixes: rust-lang#84561 This resolves problems where macros like `trace!(...)` would show zero coverage if tracing was disabled, and `assert_eq!(...)` would show zero coverage if the assertion did not fail, because only one coverage span was generated, for the branch. This PR started with an idea that I could just drop branching blocks with same span as expanded macro. (See the fixed issue for more details.) That did help, but it didn't resolve everything. I also needed to add a span specifically for the macro name (plus `!`) to ensure the macro gets coverage even if it's internal expansion adds conditional branching blocks that are retained, and would otherwise drop the outer span. Now that outer span is _only_ the `(argument, list)`, which can safely be dropped now), because the macro name has its own span. While testing, I also noticed the spanview debug output can cause an ICE on a function with no body. The workaround for this is included in this PR (separate commit). r? ``@tmandry`` cc? ``@wesleywiser``
Add HAS_RE_LATE_BOUND if there are bound vars Fixes rust-lang#83737 Fixes rust-lang#84604 I can rename `HAS_RE_LATE_BOUND`, to something like `HAS_LATE_BOUND_VARS`. r? ``@nikomatsakis``
Update LLVM for more wasm simd updates This fixes the temporary regression introduced in rust-lang#84339 where the wasm target uses `fpto{s,u}i` intrinsics but the codegen for those intrinsics with the `+nontrapping-fptoint` LLVM feature wasn't very good (aka it didn't use the wasm instruction). The fixes brought in here fix that and also implement the second-to-last simd instruction in LLVM.
Be stricter about rejecting LLVM reserved registers in asm! LLVM will silently produce incorrect code if these registers are used as operands. cc ``@rust-lang/wg-inline-asm``
…ss-for-search-results, r=Nemo157 Remove unnecessary CSS rules for search results Discovered that this was useless when working on rust-lang/docs.rs#1382. r? ``@Nemo157``
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=5 |
|
📌 Commit 6acead4 has been approved by |
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
|
⌛ Testing commit 6acead4 with merge 338e14b5a85d36ee10540abd93be783b709f888e... |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
removed
the
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain) Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #84233) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Successful merges:
--remap-path-prefix#84233 (Add TRACKED_NO_CRATE_HASH and use it for--remap-path-prefix)Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup