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 #105667

Merged
merged 36 commits into from
Dec 14, 2022
Merged

Rollup of 7 pull requests #105667

merged 36 commits into from
Dec 14, 2022

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

nbdd0121 and others added 30 commits December 8, 2022 17:23
This is handled similar to closures
The closure handling code is changed slightly to avoid allocation
when THIR building failed.
MIR unsafety checking requires this to be valid
All bodies are unsafe checked anyway. Current MIR unsafeck also just
returns for closures.
Synthesize a more accurate span and use verbose suggestion output to
make the message clearer.
…i-obk

Allow unsafe through inline const

Handle similar to closures.

Address rust-lang#104087 (comment)

Note that this PR does not fix the issue for `unsafe { [0; function_requiring_unsafe()] }`. This is fundamentally unfixable for MIR unsafeck IMO.

This PR also does not fix unsafety checking for inline const in pattern position. It actually breaks it, allowing unsafe functions to be used in inline const in pattern position without unsafe blocks. Inline const in pattern position is not visible in MIR so ignored by MIR unsafety checking (currently it is also not checked by borrow checker, which is the reason why it's considered an incomplete feature).

`@rustbot` label: +T-lang +F-inline_const
@rustbot rustbot added 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. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Dec 13, 2022
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=7

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 13, 2022

📌 Commit e0e9f3a 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 Dec 13, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 13, 2022

⌛ Testing commit e0e9f3a with merge 21ee03e...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 14, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing 21ee03e to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Dec 14, 2022
@bors bors merged commit 21ee03e into rust-lang:master Dec 14, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.68.0 milestone Dec 14, 2022
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Perf Build Sha
#105659 6c1639f00f66787d2f0fe62106af516c41989a70
#105628 4db007f9a75199a5acb3e1b5770431f1189280eb
#105500 c4fde12be215a1118430085e41513ae79de778ae
#105476 995a21ef77d5f5a4c41306ab5ebc73a7b567d9b0
#105464 75919175737cd51173a64ddc7a4fff1e00761c3c
#105438 0cf8262d36702477fdd668f1b36fc5486f26d255
#105147 47516404a8df0230f5df7e0855f67961d83e84a1

previous master: 0f529f0f49

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (21ee03e): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - ACTION NEEDED

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
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
0.4% [0.4%, 0.5%] 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.6% [0.2%, 1.3%] 20
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.4% [0.4%, 0.5%] 2

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.1% [1.1%, 3.5%] 9
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-3.6% [-7.1%, -1.7%] 4
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

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

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression Performance regression. label Dec 14, 2022
@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

This seems largely due to noisy benchmarks.

@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum removed the perf-regression Performance regression. label Dec 20, 2022
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr deleted the rollup-fexlc0b branch December 22, 2022 10:46
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 A-translation Area: Translation infrastructure, and migrating existing diagnostics to SessionDiagnostic merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. 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.