Remove `fn backtrace` and replace with usages of provider API #99431

yaahc · 2022-07-18T18:40:46Z

This PR is part of moving error into core and has been split to facilitate review.

rustbot · 2022-07-18T18:40:49Z

Hey! It looks like you've submitted a new PR for the library teams!

If this PR contains changes to any rust-lang/rust public library APIs then please comment with @rustbot label +T-libs-api -T-libs to tag it appropriately. If this PR contains changes to any unstable APIs please edit the PR description to add a link to the relevant API Change Proposal or create one if you haven't already. If you're unsure where your change falls no worries, just leave it as is and the reviewer will take a look and make a decision to forward on if necessary.

Examples of T-libs-api changes:

Stabilizing library features
Introducing insta-stable changes such as new implementations of existing stable traits on existing stable types
Introducing new or changing existing unstable library APIs (excluding permanently unstable features / features without a tracking issue)
Changing public documentation in ways that create new stability guarantees
Changing observable runtime behavior of library APIs

rust-highfive · 2022-07-18T18:40:50Z

r? @joshtriplett

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

library/std/src/error.rs

joshtriplett · 2022-07-18T19:43:14Z

@bors r+ rollup=never

bors · 2022-07-18T19:43:16Z

📌 Commit 10bb380599e28e796bfad141ea555e9ecf418543 has been approved by joshtriplett

It is now in the queue for this repository.

joshtriplett · 2022-07-19T14:39:21Z

@bors r-

@bjorn3's suggestion seems like an improvement to me. r=me with that applied (whichever of the two works), assuming it compiles.

joshtriplett · 2022-07-19T20:46:47Z

@bors r+

bors · 2022-07-19T20:46:49Z

📌 Commit 10bb380599e28e796bfad141ea555e9ecf418543 has been approved by joshtriplett

It is now in the queue for this repository.

bors · 2022-07-19T23:07:44Z

⌛ Testing commit 10bb380599e28e796bfad141ea555e9ecf418543 with merge b7dcd855e7a5f67c9b032f0688300e3227bb61f4...

bors · 2022-07-20T00:08:50Z

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

bjorn3 · 2022-07-20T10:07:23Z

error: could not compile anyhow

Probably caused by anyhow's autodetection of the backtrace feature this PR removed. The intention is that changes to the api would cause anyhow to not use backtrace, but there is a bug there I think.

https://github.com/dtolnay/anyhow/blob/master/build.rs

yaahc · 2022-07-21T18:35:19Z

I don't understand what is going wrong here. The log output from this failure doesn't show anything other than that error: could not compile anyhow messsage and I'm not able to reproduce that when compiling anyhow directly with my custom rustc toolchain. I double checked against master and against the 1.0.55 tag which matches the version that failed in the log output. If I run tests I am able to get the test_backtrace.rs test to fail because it doesn't use the probe, and instead only checks that the current compiler version is a nightly compiler, but that shouldn't be involved here, right? The probe itself looks fine and seems to work fine, what the hell!? 😭

cc @dtolnay

I guess I'm gonna try to figure out exactly what step the CI failed on to see if that helps me with getting a repro...

edit: it looks like it only failed on windows, I'm going to assume that is relevant.

rust-timer · 2022-07-26T01:30:24Z

Finished benchmarking commit (ebe571cf3c33a5e18ad1a047c97f24c41f51bea8): comparison url.

Instruction count

Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvement found
Secondary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regressions found

	mean¹	max	count²
Regressions 😿 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	1.1%	1.5%	3
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	-1.3%	-1.3%	1
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
All 😿🎉 (primary)	-1.3%	-1.3%	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

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

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩
number of relevant changes ↩

yaahc · 2022-07-26T18:20:13Z

we likely want to split it into a separate PR if there's any impact.

@Mark-Simulacrum how do we feel about these results? Results are mixed and only seem to impact incremental builds. Do you think this should be split further or can we go ahead and merge the bump together with this PR?

Mark-Simulacrum · 2022-07-26T23:06:31Z

I think I would recommend splitting to a separate PR. The results are pretty likely to be noise, but a separate PR will also isolate from any unexpected problems (e.g., from non-Linux platforms) and doesn't seem to hard. I'm happy to r+ that PR quickly :)

If the results were completely neutral then we could go ahead here, but as-is there doesn't seem to be much motivation to bundle things.

bump rustc-perf commit split off from rust-lang#99431 needed to access bugfix from rust-lang/rustc-perf#1366

yaahc · 2022-08-01T20:15:54Z

re-approving now that the rustc-perf bug has been fixed and landed separately.

@bors r=joshtriplett

bors · 2022-08-01T20:15:56Z

📌 Commit b2bbca3 has been approved by joshtriplett

It is now in the queue for this repository.

bors · 2022-08-02T03:25:50Z

⌛ Testing commit b2bbca3 with merge 9538d2d...

bors · 2022-08-02T06:09:15Z

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: joshtriplett
Pushing 9538d2d to master...

rust-timer · 2022-08-02T07:36:29Z

Finished benchmarking commit (9538d2d): comparison url.

Instruction count

Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvements found
Secondary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regressions found

	mean¹	max	count²
Regressions 😿 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	1.5%	1.5%	2
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	-0.9%	-1.4%	2
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
All 😿🎉 (primary)	-0.9%	-1.4%	2

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

Primary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regression found
Secondary benchmarks: no relevant changes found

	mean¹	max	count²
Regressions 😿 (primary)	4.2%	4.2%	1
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
All 😿🎉 (primary)	4.2%	4.2%	1

Cycles

Results

Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvements found
Secondary benchmarks: no relevant changes found

	mean¹	max	count²
Regressions 😿 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	-4.3%	-6.0%	11
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
All 😿🎉 (primary)	-4.3%	-6.0%	11

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩ ↩² ↩³
number of relevant changes ↩ ↩² ↩³

Stabilize backtrace This PR stabilizes the std::backtrace module. As of rust-lang#99431, the std::Error::backtrace item has been removed, and so the rest of the backtrace feature is set to be stabilized. Previous discussion can be found in rust-lang#72981, rust-lang#3156. Stabilized API summary: ```rust pub mod std { pub mod backtrace { pub struct Backtrace { } pub enum BacktraceStatus { Unsupported, Disabled, Captured, } impl fmt::Debug for Backtrace {} impl Backtrace { pub fn capture() -> Backtrace; pub fn force_capture() -> Backtrace; pub const fn disabled() -> Backtrace; pub fn status(&self) -> BacktraceStatus; } impl fmt::Display for Backtrace {} } } ``` `@yaahc`

Summary: It includes this fix which was backported to 1.62.1. rust-lang/rust#98950 `2022-08-06` is what will become 1.64.0. Changes are caused by: - Split TypeVisitable from TypeFoldable: rust-lang/rust#98206 - Remove `fn backtrace` and replace with usages of provider API: rust-lang/rust#99431 Reviewed By: stepancheg Differential Revision: D39277984 fbshipit-source-id: 5afc6c2b9e5ee3074ea0ede995868aef12cebf14

rustbot added the T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Jul 18, 2022

rust-highfive assigned joshtriplett Jul 18, 2022

rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jul 18, 2022

yaahc force-pushed the error-in-core branch from cb586fe to ddf1b0b Compare July 18, 2022 18:43

yaahc commented Jul 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

library/std/src/error.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

yaahc force-pushed the error-in-core branch from ddf1b0b to a00a573 Compare July 18, 2022 18:59

yaahc commented Jul 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

library/std/src/error.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

yaahc commented Jul 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

library/std/src/error.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

yaahc force-pushed the error-in-core branch from a00a573 to 10bb380 Compare July 18, 2022 19:17

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 18, 2022

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 Jul 19, 2022

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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jul 19, 2022

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 Jul 20, 2022

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jul 26, 2022

Mark-Simulacrum self-assigned this Jul 26, 2022

Mark-Simulacrum removed their assignment Jul 26, 2022

yaahc mentioned this pull request Jul 28, 2022

bump rustc-perf commit #99868

Merged

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 30, 2022

Auto merge of rust-lang#99868 - yaahc:rustc-perf-bump, r=Mark-Simulacrum

c907b6f

bump rustc-perf commit split off from rust-lang#99431 needed to access bugfix from rust-lang/rustc-perf#1366

remove fn backtrace

b2bbca3

yaahc force-pushed the error-in-core branch from 77f10bb to b2bbca3 Compare August 1, 2022 20:13

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 Aug 1, 2022

bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Aug 2, 2022

bors merged commit 9538d2d into rust-lang:master Aug 2, 2022

rustbot added this to the 1.64.0 milestone Aug 2, 2022

bors mentioned this pull request Aug 2, 2022

Move Error trait into core #99917

Merged

dtolnay mentioned this pull request Aug 2, 2022

./x.py test src/test/ui fails to build compiletest #100062

Closed

cgranade mentioned this pull request Aug 3, 2022

Cgranade/lock nightly microsoft/qsharp-runtime#1069

Merged

Systemcluster mentioned this pull request Aug 4, 2022

Deriving structs with backtrace fails since fn backtrace has been removed from Error dtolnay/thiserror#177

Closed

lnicola mentioned this pull request Aug 8, 2022

"#![feature] may not be used on the stable release channel" dtolnay/anyhow#250

Closed

JelteF mentioned this pull request Aug 20, 2022

backtrace method was removed by Rust JelteF/derive_more#195

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Remove `fn backtrace` and replace with usages of provider API #99431

Remove `fn backtrace` and replace with usages of provider API #99431

yaahc commented Jul 18, 2022

rustbot commented Jul 18, 2022

rust-highfive commented Jul 18, 2022

joshtriplett commented Jul 18, 2022

bors commented Jul 18, 2022

joshtriplett commented Jul 19, 2022

joshtriplett commented Jul 19, 2022

bors commented Jul 19, 2022

bors commented Jul 19, 2022

bors commented Jul 20, 2022

This comment has been minimized.

bjorn3 commented Jul 20, 2022

yaahc commented Jul 21, 2022 •

edited

Loading

rust-timer commented Jul 26, 2022

yaahc commented Jul 26, 2022

Mark-Simulacrum commented Jul 26, 2022

yaahc commented Aug 1, 2022

bors commented Aug 1, 2022

bors commented Aug 2, 2022

bors commented Aug 2, 2022

rust-timer commented Aug 2, 2022

Remove fn backtrace and replace with usages of provider API #99431

Remove fn backtrace and replace with usages of provider API #99431

Conversation

yaahc commented Jul 18, 2022

rustbot commented Jul 18, 2022

rust-highfive commented Jul 18, 2022

joshtriplett commented Jul 18, 2022

bors commented Jul 18, 2022

joshtriplett commented Jul 19, 2022

joshtriplett commented Jul 19, 2022

bors commented Jul 19, 2022

bors commented Jul 19, 2022

bors commented Jul 20, 2022

This comment has been minimized.

bjorn3 commented Jul 20, 2022

yaahc commented Jul 21, 2022 • edited Loading

rust-timer commented Jul 26, 2022

Instruction count

Max RSS (memory usage)

Cycles

Footnotes

yaahc commented Jul 26, 2022

Mark-Simulacrum commented Jul 26, 2022

yaahc commented Aug 1, 2022

bors commented Aug 1, 2022

bors commented Aug 2, 2022

bors commented Aug 2, 2022

rust-timer commented Aug 2, 2022

Instruction count

Max RSS (memory usage)

Cycles

Footnotes

Remove `fn backtrace` and replace with usages of provider API #99431

Remove `fn backtrace` and replace with usages of provider API #99431

yaahc commented Jul 21, 2022 •

edited

Loading