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 #73388

Closed
wants to merge 28 commits into from

Conversation

Dylan-DPC-zz
Copy link

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost

richkadel and others added 28 commits May 21, 2020 18:10
- Suggest borrowing expression if it would allow cast to work.
- Suggest using `<Type>::from(<expr>)` when appropriate.
- Minor tweak to `;` typo suggestion.

Partily address rust-lang#47136.
This initial version only injects counters at the top of each function.
Rust Coverage will require injecting additional counters at each
conditional code branch.
As suggested in PR feedback:

rust-lang#73011 (comment)

This allows count_code_region() to be handled like a normal intrinsic so
the InstanceDef::InjectedCode variant is no longer needed.
…epmaster

Add tests for 'impl Default for [T; N]'

Related: rust-lang#71690.
This pull request adds two tests:
- Even it T::default() panics, no leaks occur.
- [T; 0] is Default even if T is not.

I believe at some moment `Default` impl for arrays will be rewritten to use const generics instead of macros, and these tests will help to prevent behavior changes.
…ies, r=shepmaster

Complete the std::time documentation to warn about the inconsistencies between OS

Fix for rust-lang#48980.

I put the new documentation in `src/libstd/time.rs` at the module-level because it affects all types, even the one that are not directly system dependents if they are used with affected types, but there may be a better place for it.
… r=tmandry

first stage of implementing LLVM code coverage

This PR replaces rust-lang#70680 (WIP toward LLVM Code Coverage for Rust) since I am re-implementing the Rust LLVM code coverage feature in a different part of the compiler (in MIR pass(es) vs AST).

This PR updates rustc with `-Zinstrument-coverage` option that injects the llvm intrinsic `instrprof.increment()` for code generation.

This initial version only injects counters at the top of each function, and does not yet implement the required coverage map.

Upcoming PRs will add the coverage map, and add more counters and/or counter expressions for each conditional code branch.

Rust compiler MCP rust-lang/compiler-team#278
Relevant issue: rust-lang#34701 - Implement support for LLVMs code coverage instrumentation

***[I put together some development notes here, under a separate branch.](https://github.com/richkadel/rust/blob/cfa0b21d34ee64e4ebee226101bd2ef0c6757865/src/test/codegen/coverage-experiments/README-THIS-IS-TEMPORARY.md)***
…dtwco

Tweak "non-primitive cast" error

- Suggest borrowing expression if it would allow cast to work.
- Suggest using `<Type>::from(<expr>)` when appropriate.
- Minor tweak to `;` typo suggestion.

Partily address rust-lang#47136.
…num-cpus, r=Mark-Simulacrum

Add more info to `x.py build --help` on default value for `-j JOBS`.
@Dylan-DPC-zz
Copy link
Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=7

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 16, 2020

📌 Commit 11999c4 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 16, 2020
@Aaron1011
Copy link
Member

@bors retry

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 16, 2020

⌛ Testing commit 11999c4 with merge f56f7a70d94427b50737ad95cefd978e0ef1672d...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 16, 2020

💔 Test failed - checks-azure

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jun 16, 2020
@Dylan-DPC-zz Dylan-DPC-zz deleted the rollup-3a6xqoc branch June 16, 2020 12:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.