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 7 pull requests #108888

Closed
wants to merge 19 commits into from

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

celinval and others added 19 commits March 3, 2023 16:56
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 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
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=7

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 8, 2023

📌 Commit f102978 has been approved by matthiaskrgr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors 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
@JohnTitor
Copy link
Member

This contains #108017 and it should result in failing as same as #108886 (comment).
@bors r-

@bors 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
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr deleted the rollup-ef3h579 branch March 16, 2024 18:19
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.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants