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.

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 5 pull requests #97795

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Jun 6, 2022
Merged

Rollup of 5 pull requests #97795

merged 13 commits into from
Jun 6, 2022

Conversation

Dylan-DPC
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

clarfonthey and others added 13 commits May 28, 2022 17:20
…er-errors

Compute lifetimes in scope at diagnostic time

The set of available lifetimes is currently computed during lifetime resolution on HIR.  It is only used for one diagnostic.

In this PR, HIR lifetime resolution just reports whether elided lifetimes are well-defined at the place of use.  The diagnostic code is responsible for building a list of lifetime names if elision is not allowed.

This will allow to remove lifetime resolution on HIR eventually.
…gisa

Add E0788 for improper #[no_coverage] usage

Essentially, this adds proper checking for the attribute (tracking issue rust-lang#84605) and throws errors when it's put in obviously-wrong places, like on struct or const definitions. Most of the code is taken directly from the checks for the `#[inline]` attribute, since it's very similar.

Right now, the code only checks at the function level, but it seems reasonable to allow adding `#[no_coverage]` to individual blocks or expressions, so, for now those just throw `unused_attributes` warnings. Similarly, since there was a lot of desire to eventually allow recursive definitions as well on modules and impl blocks, these also throw `unused_attributes` instead of an error.

I'm not sure if anything has to be done since this error is technically for an unstable feature, but since an error for using unstable features will show up anyway, I think it's okay.

This is the first big piece needed for stabilising this attribute, although I personally would like to explore renaming it to `#[coverage(never)]` on a separate PR, which I will offer soon. There's a lot of discussion still to be had about that, which is why it will be kept separate.

I don't think much is needed besides adding this simple check and a UI test, but let me know if there's something else that should be added to make this happen.
Avoid creating `SmallVec`s in `global_llvm_features`

This PR made a simple optimization to avoid creating extra `SmallVec`s by adjusting the use of iterator statements.
Also, given the very small size of `tied_target_features`, there is no need to insert each feature into the FxHashMap.
interpret: do not claim UB until we looked more into variadic functions

I am not actually sure if this is UB, and anyway for FFI shims, Miri currently does not attempt to distinguish between arguments passed via variadics vs directly. So let's be consistent.
(Programs that ran into this error will anyway immediately fall through to the "unsupported" message on the next line.)
…-DPC

E0432: rust 2018 -> rust 2018 or later    in --explain message
@rustbot rustbot added T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Jun 6, 2022
@Dylan-DPC
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ p=5 rollup=never

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 6, 2022

📌 Commit 99afe26 has been approved by Dylan-DPC

@bors bors added the S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. label Jun 6, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 6, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 99afe26 with merge 357bc27...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 6, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Dylan-DPC
Pushing 357bc27 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jun 6, 2022
@bors bors merged commit 357bc27 into rust-lang:master Jun 6, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.63.0 milestone Jun 6, 2022
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (357bc27): comparison url.

Instruction count

  • Primary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regressions found
  • Secondary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regression found
mean1 max count2
Regressions 😿
(primary)
0.3% 0.3% 6
Regressions 😿
(secondary)
0.4% 0.4% 1
Improvements 🎉
(primary)
N/A N/A 0
Improvements 🎉
(secondary)
N/A N/A 0
All 😿🎉 (primary) 0.3% 0.3% 6

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results
  • Primary benchmarks: no relevant changes found
  • Secondary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regressions found
mean1 max count2
Regressions 😿
(primary)
N/A N/A 0
Regressions 😿
(secondary)
2.2% 2.3% 2
Improvements 🎉
(primary)
N/A N/A 0
Improvements 🎉
(secondary)
N/A N/A 0
All 😿🎉 (primary) N/A N/A 0

Cycles

Results
  • Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvement found
  • Secondary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regression found
mean1 max count2
Regressions 😿
(primary)
N/A N/A 0
Regressions 😿
(secondary)
3.1% 3.1% 1
Improvements 🎉
(primary)
-2.1% -2.1% 1
Improvements 🎉
(secondary)
N/A N/A 0
All 😿🎉 (primary) -2.1% -2.1% 1

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression

Footnotes

  1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change 2 3

  2. number of relevant changes 2 3

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression Performance regression. label Jun 6, 2022
@rylev
Copy link
Member

rylev commented Jun 7, 2022

This looks to be caused by some variability in the Diesel benchmark. The regressions seen here are reversed in the next PR (an update to Clippy).

#97730 (Comparison Link)

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label Jun 7, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

10 participants