-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
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
Don't accidentally detect the commit hash as an fadd
instruction
#116591
Conversation
(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
There may be a more principled or universal way to achieve this, so I'm open to suggestions. It's a little hard to properly test that this change actually works (especially since I'm not even on |
@bors r+ rollup I'm happy to land this. |
…iaskrgr Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#115439 (rustdoc: hide `#[repr(transparent)]` if it isn't part of the public ABI) - rust-lang#116591 (Don't accidentally detect the commit hash as an `fadd` instruction) - rust-lang#116603 (Reorganize `bootstrap/Cargo.toml`) - rust-lang#116715 (Prevent more spurious unreachable pattern lints) - rust-lang#116723 (Fix broken build on ESP-IDF caused by rust-lang#115108) - rust-lang#116730 (Add some unsoundness tests for opaques capturing hidden regions not in substs) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Rollup merge of rust-lang#116591 - Zalathar:flaky-hash, r=Mark-Simulacrum Don't accidentally detect the commit hash as an `fadd` instruction I've seen some reports of `tests/codegen/target-feature-inline-closure.rs` spuriously failing because it thinks the hash in the rustc version number contains an `fadd` instruction. rust-lang#116085 (comment) https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Is.20.60tests.2Fcodegen.2Ftarget-feature-inline-closure.2Ers.60.20flakey https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Strange.20.5Cn.20in.20output.20of.20assert.20.23108341/near/395811335 This PR tries to make that not happen by adding a `CHECK-LABEL` directive that will match the line with the rustc version string, preventing the previous `CHECK-NOT` from seeing it.
54: Pull upstream master 2023 10 17 r=pietroalbini a=Veykril * rust-lang/rust#116196 * rust-lang/rust#116824 * rust-lang/rust#116822 * rust-lang/rust#116477 * rust-lang/rust#116826 * rust-lang/rust#116820 * rust-lang/rust#116811 * rust-lang/rust#116808 * rust-lang/rust#116805 * rust-lang/rust#116800 * rust-lang/rust#116798 * rust-lang/rust#116754 * rust-lang/rust#114370 * rust-lang/rust#116804 * rust-lang/rust#116802 * rust-lang/rust#116790 * rust-lang/rust#116786 * rust-lang/rust#116709 * rust-lang/rust#116430 * rust-lang/rust#116257 * rust-lang/rust#114157 * rust-lang/rust#116731 * rust-lang/rust#116550 * rust-lang/rust#114330 * rust-lang/rust#116724 * rust-lang/rust#116782 * rust-lang/rust#116776 * rust-lang/rust#115955 * rust-lang/rust#115196 * rust-lang/rust#116775 * rust-lang/rust#114589 * rust-lang/rust#113747 * rust-lang/rust#116772 * rust-lang/rust#116771 * rust-lang/rust#116760 * rust-lang/rust#116755 * rust-lang/rust#116732 * rust-lang/rust#116522 * rust-lang/rust#116341 * rust-lang/rust#116172 * rust-lang/rust#110604 * rust-lang/rust#110729 * rust-lang/rust#116527 * rust-lang/rust#116688 * rust-lang/rust#116757 * rust-lang/rust#116753 * rust-lang/rust#116748 * rust-lang/rust#116741 * rust-lang/rust#116594 * rust-lang/rust#116691 * rust-lang/rust#116643 * rust-lang/rust#116683 * rust-lang/rust#116635 * rust-lang/rust#115515 * rust-lang/rust#116742 * rust-lang/rust#116661 * rust-lang/rust#116576 * rust-lang/rust#116540 * rust-lang/rust#116352 * rust-lang/rust#116737 * rust-lang/rust#116730 * rust-lang/rust#116723 * rust-lang/rust#116715 * rust-lang/rust#116603 * rust-lang/rust#116591 * rust-lang/rust#115439 * rust-lang/rust#116264 * rust-lang/rust#116727 * rust-lang/rust#116704 * rust-lang/rust#116696 * rust-lang/rust#116695 * rust-lang/rust#116644 * rust-lang/rust#116630 * rust-lang/rust#116728 * rust-lang/rust#116689 * rust-lang/rust#116679 * rust-lang/rust#116618 * rust-lang/rust#116577 * rust-lang/rust#115653 * rust-lang/rust#116702 * rust-lang/rust#116015 * rust-lang/rust#115822 * rust-lang/rust#116407 * rust-lang/rust#115719 * rust-lang/rust#115524 * rust-lang/rust#116705 * rust-lang/rust#116645 * rust-lang/rust#116233 * rust-lang/rust#115108 * rust-lang/rust#116670 * rust-lang/rust#116676 * rust-lang/rust#116666 Co-authored-by: Benoît du Garreau <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Colin Finck <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Ian Jackson <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Joshua Liebow-Feeser <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: León Orell Valerian Liehr <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Trevor Gross <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Evan Merlock <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: joboet <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Ralf Jung <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: DaniPopes <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Mark Rousskov <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: onur-ozkan <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Nicholas Nethercote <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: The 8472 <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Samuel Thibault <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: reez12g <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Jakub Beránek <[email protected]>
I've seen some reports of
tests/codegen/target-feature-inline-closure.rs
spuriously failing because it thinks the hash in the rustc version number contains anfadd
instruction.#116085 (comment)
https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Is.20.60tests.2Fcodegen.2Ftarget-feature-inline-closure.2Ers.60.20flakey
https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Strange.20.5Cn.20in.20output.20of.20assert.20.23108341/near/395811335
This PR tries to make that not happen by adding a
CHECK-LABEL
directive that will match the line with the rustc version string, preventing the previousCHECK-NOT
from seeing it.