Rollup of 9 pull requests #85022
Merged
Rollup of 9 pull requests #85022
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
This allows running a single test without having to wait for all tests to complete.
Bootstrap has to build successfully or this won't run, so all it checks are the tests, which are uncommon to change.
We've been seeing a pretty high rate of spurious network failures (e.g., openssl connection reset by peer). Not clear why, but let's add a retry.
Fixes: rust-lang#84884 This solution might be considered a compromise, but I think it is the better choice. The results in the `closure.rs` test correctly resolve all test cases broken as described in rust-lang#84884. One test pattern (in both `closure_macro.rs` and `closure_macro_async.rs`) was also affected, and removes coverage statistics for the lines inside the closure, because the closure includes a macro. (The coverage remains at the callsite of the macro, so we lose some detail, but there isn't a perfect choice with macros. Often macro implementations are split across the macro and the callsite, and there doesn't appear to be a single "right choice" for which body should be covered. For the current implementation, we can't do both. The callsite is most likely to be the preferred site for coverage. I applied this fix to all `MacroKinds`, not just `Bang`. I'm trying to resolve an issue of lost coverage in a `MacroKind::Attr`-based, function-scoped macro. Instead of only searching for a body_span that is "not a function-like macro" (that is, MacroKind::Bang), I'm expanding this to all `MacroKind`s. Maybe I should expand this to `ExpnKind::Desugaring` and `ExpnKind::AstPass` (or subsets, depending on their sub-kinds) as well, but I'm not sure that's a good idea. I'd like to add a test of the `Attr` macro on functions, but I need time to figure out how to constract a good, simple example without external crate dependencies. For the moment, all tests still work as expected (no change), this new commit shouldn't have a negative affect, and more importantly, I believe it will have a positive effect. I will try to confirm this.
…rage And redirect users from the old file name.
And adds tests to validate it still works. There is an anticipated feature request to support a compiler flag that only adds coverage for specific files (or perhaps mods). As I thought about where that change would need to be supported, I realized that checking the attribute in mapgen (for unused functions) was unnecessary. The unused functions are only synthesized if they have MIR coverage, and functions with the `no_coverage` attribute will not have been instrumented with MIR coverage statements in the first place. New tests confirm this. Also, while adding tests, I updated resolved comments and FIXMEs in other tests.
…acrum Add support for --test-args to cargotest This allows running a single test without having to wait for all tests to complete. Closes rust-lang#77260.
…lacrum Don't check bootstrap artifacts by default Bootstrap has to build successfully or this won't run, so all it checks are the tests, which are uncommon to change. Fixes rust-lang#76624.
bump deps openssl vulns: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2021-0056.html https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2021-0055.html openssl-src v111.12.0+1.1.1h -> v111.15.0+1.1.1k not latest, but newer openssl-sys v0.9.58 -> v0.9.61 openssl v0.10.30 -> v0.10.33 curl vulns: https://curl.se/docs/vuln-7.74.0.html curl v0.4.34 -> v0.4.36 curl-sys v0.4.39+curl-7.74.0 -> v0.4.42+curl-7.76.0
…-05, r=tmandry Update coverage docs and command line help r? `@tmandry` cc: `@wesleywiser`
…used, r=tmandry Removes unneeded check of `#[no_coverage]` in mapgen There is an anticipated feature request to support a compiler flag that only adds coverage for specific files (or perhaps mods). As I thought about where that change would need to be supported, I realized that checking the attribute in mapgen (for unused functions) was unnecessary. The unused functions are only synthesized if they have MIR coverage, and functions with the `no_coverage` attribute will not have been instrumented with MIR coverage statements in the first place. New tests confirm this. Also, while adding tests, I updated resolved comments and FIXMEs in other tests, and expanded comments and tests on one remaining issue that is still not resolved. r? `@tmandry` cc: `@wesleywiser`
…mandry Coverage instruments closure bodies in macros (not the macro body) Fixes: rust-lang#84884 This solution might be considered a compromise, but I think it is the better choice. The results in the `closure.rs` test correctly resolve all test cases broken as described in rust-lang#84884. One test pattern (in both `closure_macro.rs` and `closure_macro_async.rs`) was also affected, and removes coverage statistics for the lines inside the closure, because the closure includes a macro. (The coverage remains at the callsite of the macro, so we lose some detail, but there isn't a perfect choice with macros. Often macro implementations are split across the macro and the callsite, and there doesn't appear to be a single "right choice" for which body should be covered. For the current implementation, we can't do both. The callsite is most likely to be the preferred site for coverage. r? `@tmandry` cc: `@wesleywiser`
…roalbini Retry clang+llvm download We've been seeing a pretty high rate of spurious network failures (e.g., openssl connection reset by peer). Not clear why, but let's add a retry. r? `@pietroalbini`
CTFE inbounds-error-messages tweak * use CheckInAllocMsg::PointerArithmeticTest for ptr_offset error * nicer errors for some null pointer cases r? `@oli-obk`
…ts, r=Mark-Simulacrum Sort rustdoc-gui tests The rustdoc-gui tests were randomly run. Not really a big issue but I prefer the tests to be sorted.
|
@bors r+ p=9 rollup=never |
|
📌 Commit 87faf2e has been approved by |
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
rust-highfive
added a commit
to rust-lang-nursery/rust-toolstate
that referenced
this pull request
May 7, 2021
Tested on commit rust-lang/rust@ac888e8. Direct link to PR: <rust-lang/rust#85022> 💔 miri on windows: test-pass → test-fail (cc @oli-obk @eddyb @RalfJung). 💔 miri on linux: test-pass → test-fail (cc @oli-obk @eddyb @RalfJung).
This was referenced May 7, 2021
Merged
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:
#[no_coverage]in mapgen #84875 (Removes unneeded check of#[no_coverage]in mapgen)Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup