-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
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 7 pull requests #108888
Closed
Closed
Rollup of 7 pull requests #108888
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 approach didn't seem to work well.
+ Add some information to the README.md
…, r=pietroalbini use problem matchers for tidy CI
Add `--no-undefined-version` link flag and fix associated breakage LLVM upstream sets `--no-undefined-version` by default in lld: https://reviews.llvm.org/D135402. Due to a bug in how version scripts are generated, this breaks the `dylib` output type for most crates. See rust-lang#105967 (comment) for details. This PR adds the flag to gcc flavor linkers in anticipation of this LLVM change rolling in, and patches `rustc` to not attempt to export `__rust_*` allocator symbols when they weren't generated. Fixes rust-lang#105967
rust-lang#107307 Implementing "<test_binary> --list --format json" for use by IDE test explorers / runners PR 1 of 2 - wiring up just the new information + implement the command line changes i.e. --format json + tests upcoming: PR 2 of 2 - clean up "#[cfg(not(bootstrap))]" from PR 1 As per the discussions on - MCP: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/233931-t-compiler.2Fmajor-changes/topic/Implementing.20.22.3Ctest_binary.3E.20--list.20--form.E2.80.A6.20compiler-team.23592/near/328747548 - preRFC: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/pre-rfc-implementing-test-binary-list-format-json-for-use-by-ide-test-explorers-runners/18308 - FYI on Discord: https://discord.com/channels/442252698964721669/459149169546887178/1075581549409484820
Retry `pred_known_to_hold_modulo_regions` with fulfillment if ambiguous Fixes rust-lang#108721 The problem here is that when we're checking `is_sized_raw` during codegen on some type that has a lot of opaques in it, something emits several nested obligations that are individually ambiguous, but when processed together in a loop then apply modulo regions. Since the `evaluate_predicates_recursively` inner loop doesn't process predicates until they stop changing, we return `EvaluatedToAmbig`, which makes the sized check return false incorrectly. See: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/f15f0ea73972786e426732c5b92ba9a904b866c4/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/mod.rs#L596-L606 ... Compared to the analogous loop in the new solver: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/f15f0ea73972786e426732c5b92ba9a904b866c4/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/solve/mod.rs#L481-L512 To fix this, if we get ambiguous during `pred_known_to_hold_modulo_regions`, just retry the obligation in a fulfillment context. -- Unfortunately... I don't have a test for this. I've only tested this locally. Pending minimization :/ r? types
StableMIR: Proof-of-concept implementation + test This PR is part of the [project Stable MIR](https://github.com/rust-lang/project-stable-mir). The PR deletes old re-exports from rustc_smir and introduces a proof-of-concept implementation for APIs to retrieve crate information. The implementation follows the [design described here](https://hackmd.io/XhnYHKKuR6-LChhobvlT-g?view), but instead of using separate crates for the implementation, it uses separate modules inside `rustc_smir`. The API introduced at this point should be seen just as an example on how we are planning to structure the communication between tools and the compiler. I have not explored yet what should be the right granularity, the best starting point for users, neither the best way to implement it. r? ``@oli-obk``
Tweak E0740 Also drive-by suppress E0740 if it's an unresolved type.
…, r=BoxyUwU Suppress copy impl error when post-normalized type references errors Suppress spurious errors from the `Copy` impl validity check when fields have bad types *post*-normalization, instead of just pre-normalization. ---- The const-generics test regressed recently due to rust-lang#107965, cc `@BoxyUwU.` * I think it's because `[_; 0u32]: Copy` now fails to hold because a nested obligation `ConstArgHasType(0u32, usize)` fails. * It's interesting that `[const_error]` shows up in the type only after normalization, though, but I'm pretty sure that it's due to the evaluate call that happens when normalizing unevaluated consts.
rustbot
added
A-testsuite
Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc
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.
T-infra
Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
T-libs
Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
T-rustdoc
Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
rollup
A PR which is a rollup
labels
Mar 8, 2023
@bors r+ rollup=never p=7 |
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
Mar 8, 2023
This contains #108017 and it should result in failing as same as #108886 (comment). |
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
Mar 8, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
A-testsuite
Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc
rollup
A PR which is a rollup
S-waiting-on-author
Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author.
T-compiler
Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
T-infra
Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
T-libs
Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
T-rustdoc
Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
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-undefined-version
link flag and fix associated breakage #108017 (Add--no-undefined-version
link flag and fix associated breakage)pred_known_to_hold_modulo_regions
with fulfillment if ambiguous #108754 (Retrypred_known_to_hold_modulo_regions
with fulfillment if ambiguous)Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup