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

Migrate std-core-cycle, obey-crate-type-flag, mixing-libs and issue-18943 run-make tests to rmake.rs #126484

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 16, 2024

Conversation

Oneirical
Copy link
Contributor

@Oneirical Oneirical commented Jun 14, 2024

Part of #121876 and the associated Google Summer of Code project.

try-job: x86_64-apple-1
try-job: x86_64-msvc
try-job: aarch64-gnu

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jun 14, 2024

r? @jieyouxu

rustbot has assigned @jieyouxu.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added A-run-make Area: port run-make Makefiles to rmake.rs 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-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) labels Jun 14, 2024
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jun 14, 2024

This PR modifies tests/run-make/. If this PR is trying to port a Makefile
run-make test to use rmake.rs, please update the
run-make port tracking issue
so we can track our progress. You can either modify the tracking issue
directly, or you can comment on the tracking issue and link this PR.

cc @jieyouxu

The run-make-support library was changed

cc @jieyouxu

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@Oneirical Oneirical changed the title Migrate std-core-cycle, obey-crate-type-flag and issue-18943 run-make tests to rmake.rs Migrate std-core-cycle, obey-crate-type-flag, mixing-libs and issue-18943 run-make tests to rmake.rs Jun 14, 2024
Copy link
Member

@jieyouxu jieyouxu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the PR. I have some concerns regarding the APIs and their implementation introduced in this PR that warrants further discussion, but the tests themselves look very reasonable.

src/tools/run-make-support/src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/run-make-support/src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/run-make/lib-trait-for-trait-no-ice/rmake.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/run-make/mixing-libs/rmake.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/run-make/obey-crate-type-flag/rmake.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/run-make/obey-crate-type-flag/rmake.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@rustbot rustbot 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-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jun 16, 2024
@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

jieyouxu commented Jun 16, 2024

I've also took the liberty to edit the PR description to include try jobs for apple (darwin), windows and linux for the std-core-cycle. This PR should be run on those try jobs before approval.

@bors rollup=iffy (the std-core-cycle looks platform-difference sensitive)

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. 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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jun 17, 2024
@Oneirical
Copy link
Contributor Author

Oneirical commented Jun 17, 2024

I have removed glob once more and removed all instances of remove_rlibs and associated functions. I only kept a new version of count_files_with_extension.

@rustbot review
Needs try job.

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jun 17, 2024
@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

@bors delegate+ (for running try job, don't r+ just yet)

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 17, 2024

✌️ @Oneirical, you can now approve this pull request!

If @jieyouxu told you to "r=me" after making some further change, please make that change, then do @bors r=@jieyouxu

@rustbot rustbot 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-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jun 17, 2024
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 3, 2024

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #127044) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@Oneirical Oneirical force-pushed the test-in-peace branch 2 times, most recently from b2a7e20 to 3fe832d Compare July 5, 2024 14:14
@Oneirical
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rustbot review

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-blocked Status: Marked as blocked ❌ on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. labels Jul 5, 2024
Copy link
Member

@jieyouxu jieyouxu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, r=Kobzol and I after addressing the suggestions.


fn main() {
rustc().input("foo.rs").crate_type("lib").run();
fs_wrapper::remove_file(rust_lib_name("foo"));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggestion: this should be checking for existence of the lib file, not checking-by-proxy via trying to remove it I feel like?

Comment on lines 14 to 18
fs_wrapper::remove_file(dynamic_lib_name("test"));
fs_wrapper::remove_file(rust_lib_name("test"));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggestion: ditto here about checking for existence, not checking-by-proxy via trying to remove file.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In this particular case, removing the rust lib is necessary for the final check to work, but to make it explicit, I made it so it checks existence then removes it. Even though the removal checks for existence, it should be clearer for the test reader.

@Oneirical
Copy link
Contributor Author

Forgot to queue this one up.
@bors r=jieyouxu,kobzol

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 16, 2024

📌 Commit cbc62cb has been approved by jieyouxu,kobzol

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 Jul 16, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 16, 2024

⌛ Testing commit cbc62cb with merge 032be6f...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 16, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: jieyouxu,kobzol
Pushing 032be6f to master...

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (032be6f): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 7.1%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
7.1% [7.1%, 7.1%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 7.1% [7.1%, 7.1%] 1

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 699.147s -> 700.459s (0.19%)
Artifact size: 328.64 MiB -> 328.60 MiB (-0.02%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-run-make Area: port run-make Makefiles to rmake.rs A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap)
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants