Rollup of 8 pull requests #93287
Closed
Rollup of 8 pull requests #93287
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
As suggested in rust-lang#88564. This adds a `try_clone()` to `OwnedFd` by refactoring the code out of the existing `File`/`Socket` code.
`WSADuplicateSocketW` returns 0 on success, which differs from handle-oriented functions which return 0 on error. Use `sys::net::cvt` to handle its return value, which handles the socket convention of returning 0 on success, rather than `sys::cvt`, which handles the handle-oriented convention of returning 0 on failure.
Fixes rust-lang#92987 During evaluation of an auto trait predicate, we may encounter a cycle. This causes us to store the evaluation result in a special 'provisional cache;. If we later end up determining that the type can legitimately implement the auto trait despite the cycle, we remove the entry from the provisional cache, and insert it into the evaluation cache. Additionally, trait evaluation creates a special anonymous `DepNode`. All queries invoked during the predicate evaluation are added as outoging dependency edges from the `DepNode`. This `DepNode` is then store in the evaluation cache - if a different query ends up reading from the cache entry, it will also perform a read of the stored `DepNode`. As a result, the cached evaluation will still end up (transitively) incurring all of the same dependencies that it would if it actually performed the uncached evaluation (e.g. a call to `type_of` to determine constituent types). Previously, we did not correctly handle the interaction between the provisional cache and the created `DepNode`. Storing an evaluation result in the provisional cache would cause us to lose the `DepNode` created during the evaluation. If we later moved the entry from the provisional cache to the evaluation cache, we would use the `DepNode` associated with the evaluation that caused us to 'complete' the cycle, not the evaluatoon where we first discovered the cycle. As a result, future reads from the evaluation cache would miss some incremental compilation dependencies that would have otherwise been added if the evaluation was *not* cached. Under the right circumstances, this could lead to us trying to force a query with a no-longer-existing `DefPathHash`, since we were missing the (red) dependency edge that would have caused us to bail out before attempting forcing. This commit makes the provisional cache store the `DepNode` create during the provisional evaluation. When we move an entry from the provisional cache to the evaluation cache, we create a *new* `DepNode` that has dependencies going to *both* of the evaluation `DepNodes` we have available. This ensures that cached reads will incur all of the necessary dependency edges.
If we do not add code coverage instrumentation to the `Body` of a
function, then when we go to generate the function record for it, we
won't write any data and this later causes llvm-cov to fail when
processing data for the entire coverage report.
I've identified two main cases where we do not currently add code
coverage instrumentation to the `Body` of a function:
1. If the function has a single `BasicBlock` and it ends with a
`TerminatorKind::Unreachable`.
2. If the function is created using a proc macro of some kind.
For case 1, this typically not important as this most often occurs as
the result of function definitions that take or return uninhabited
types. These kinds of functions, by definition, cannot even be called so
they logically should not be counted in code coverage statistics.
For case 2, I haven't looked into this very much but I've noticed while
testing this patch that (other than functions which are covered by case
1) the skipped function coverage debug message is occasionally triggered
in large crate graphs by functions generated from a proc macro. This may
have something to do with weird spans being generated by the proc macro
but this is just a guess.
I think it's reasonable to land this change since currently, we fail to
generate *any* results from llvm-cov when a function has no coverage
instrumentation applied to it. With this change, we get coverage data
for all functions other than the two cases discussed above.
This reduces the number of clicks required to change theme. Also, simplify the UI a bit (remove setting grouping), and add a "Back" link close to the settings icon.
This agrees with Clang, and avoids an error when using LTO with mixed C/Rust. LLVM considers different behaviour flags to be a mismatch, even when the flag value itself is the same. This also makes the flag setting explicit for all uses of LLVMRustAddModuleFlag.
…r=joshtriplett Add a `try_clone()` function to `OwnedFd`. As suggested in rust-lang#88564. This adds a `try_clone()` to `OwnedFd` by refactoring the code out of the existing `File`/`Socket` code. r? `@joshtriplett`
…ichaelwoerister Properly track `DepNode`s in trait evaluation provisional cache Fixes rust-lang#92987 During evaluation of an auto trait predicate, we may encounter a cycle. This causes us to store the evaluation result in a special 'provisional cache;. If we later end up determining that the type can legitimately implement the auto trait despite the cycle, we remove the entry from the provisional cache, and insert it into the evaluation cache. Additionally, trait evaluation creates a special anonymous `DepNode`. All queries invoked during the predicate evaluation are added as outoging dependency edges from the `DepNode`. This `DepNode` is then store in the evaluation cache - if a different query ends up reading from the cache entry, it will also perform a read of the stored `DepNode`. As a result, the cached evaluation will still end up (transitively) incurring all of the same dependencies that it would if it actually performed the uncached evaluation (e.g. a call to `type_of` to determine constituent types). Previously, we did not correctly handle the interaction between the provisional cache and the created `DepNode`. Storing an evaluation result in the provisional cache would cause us to lose the `DepNode` created during the evaluation. If we later moved the entry from the provisional cache to the evaluation cache, we would use the `DepNode` associated with the evaluation that caused us to 'complete' the cycle, not the evaluatoon where we first discovered the cycle. As a result, future reads from the evaluation cache would miss some incremental compilation dependencies that would have otherwise been added if the evaluation was *not* cached. Under the right circumstances, this could lead to us trying to force a query with a no-longer-existing `DefPathHash`, since we were missing the (red) dependency edge that would have caused us to bail out before attempting forcing. This commit makes the provisional cache store the `DepNode` create during the provisional evaluation. When we move an entry from the provisional cache to the evaluation cache, we create a *new* `DepNode` that has dependencies going to *both* of the evaluation `DepNodes` we have available. This ensures that cached reads will incur all of the necessary dependency edges.
…bank Move param count error emission to end of `check_argument_types` The error emission here isn't exactly what is done in rust-lang#92364, but replicating that is hard . The general move should make for a smaller diff. Also included the `(usize, Ty, Ty)` to -> `Option<(Ty, Ty)>` commit. r? `@estebank`
…ov2, r=tmandry
Work around missing code coverage data causing llvm-cov failures
If we do not add code coverage instrumentation to the `Body` of a
function, then when we go to generate the function record for it, we
won't write any data and this later causes llvm-cov to fail when
processing data for the entire coverage report.
I've identified two main cases where we do not currently add code
coverage instrumentation to the `Body` of a function:
1. If the function has a single `BasicBlock` and it ends with a
`TerminatorKind::Unreachable`.
2. If the function is created using a proc macro of some kind.
For case 1, this is typically not important as this most often occurs as
a result of function definitions that take or return uninhabited
types. These kinds of functions, by definition, cannot even be called so
they logically should not be counted in code coverage statistics.
For case 2, I haven't looked into this very much but I've noticed while
testing this patch that (other than functions which are covered by case
1) the skipped function coverage debug message is occasionally triggered
in large crate graphs by functions generated from a proc macro. This may
have something to do with weird spans being generated by the proc macro
but this is just a guess.
I think it's reasonable to land this change since currently, we fail to
generate *any* results from llvm-cov when a function has no coverage
instrumentation applied to it. With this change, we get coverage data
for all functions other than the two cases discussed above.
Fixes rust-lang#93054 which occurs because of uncallable functions which shouldn't
have code coverage anyway.
I will open an issue for missing code coverage of proc macro generated
functions and leave a link here once I have a more minimal repro.
r? `@tmandry`
cc `@richkadel`
…ency, r=GuillaumeGomez Fix inconsistency of local blanket impls When a blanket impl is local, go through HIR instead of middle. This fixes inconsistencies with data detected during JSON generation. Expected this change to take longer. I also tried doing the whole item through existing clean architecture, but it didn't work out trivially, and felt like it would have added more complexity than it removed. Properly fixes rust-lang#83718
…e-new, r=nikomatsakis Implement stable overlap check considering negative traits This PR implement the new disjointness rules for overlap check described in https://rust-lang.github.io/negative-impls-initiative/explainer/coherence-check.html#new-disjointness-rules r? `@nikomatsakis`
rustdoc settings: use radio buttons for theme This reduces the number of clicks required to change theme. Also, simplify the UI a bit (remove setting grouping), and add a "Back" link close to the settings icon. Demo: https://rustdoc.crud.net/jsha/theme-radio/settings.html r? `@GuillaumeGomez` New:  Old: 
…petrochenkov Use error-on-mismatch policy for PAuth module flags. This agrees with Clang, and avoids an error when using LTO with mixed C/Rust. LLVM considers different behaviour flags to be a mismatch, even when the flag value itself is the same. This also makes the flag setting explicit for all uses of LLVMRustAddModuleFlag. ---- I believe that this fixes rust-lang#92885, but have only reproduced it locally on Linux hosts so cannot confirm that it fixes the issue as reported. I have not included a test for this because it is covered by an existing test (`src/test/run-make-fulldeps/cross-lang-lto-clang`). It is not without its problems, though: * The test requires Clang and `--run-clang-based-tests-with=...` to run, and this is not the case on the CI. * Any test I add would have a similar requirement. * With this patch applied, the test gets further, but it still fails (for other reasons). I don't think that affects rust-lang#92885.
rustbot
added
T-compiler
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:
try_clone()function toOwnedFd. #88794 (Add atry_clone()function toOwnedFd.)DepNodes in trait evaluation provisional cache #93064 (Properly trackDepNodes in trait evaluation provisional cache)check_argument_types#93118 (Move param count error emission to end ofcheck_argument_types)Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup