Automatic Rustup #3693
Merged
Automatic Rustup #3693
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
…mpiler-errors
improve tip for inaccessible traits
Improve the tips when the candidate method is from an inaccessible trait.
For example:
```rs
mod m {
trait Trait {
fn f() {}
}
impl<T> Trait for T {}
}
fn main() {
struct S;
S::f();
}
```
The difference between before and now is:
```diff
error[E0599]: no function or associated item named `f` found for struct `S` in the current scope
--> ./src/main.rs:88:6
|
LL | struct S;
| -------- function or associated item `f` not found for this struct
LL | S::f();
| ^ function or associated item not found in `S`
|
= help: items from traits can only be used if the trait is implemented and in scope
- help: trait `Trait` which provides `f` is implemented but not in scope; perhaps you want to import it
+ help: trait `crate::m::Trait` which provides `f` is implemented but not reachable
|
- LL + use crate::m::Trait;
|
```
…hercote MCDC Coverage: instrument last boolean RHS operands from condition coverage Fresh PR from #124652 -- This PR ensures that the top-level boolean expressions that are not part of the control flow are correctly instrumented thanks to condition coverage. See discussion on rust-lang/rust#124120. Depends on `@Zalathar` 's condition coverage implementation #125756.
StorageLive: refresh storage (instead of UB) when local is already live Blocked on [this FCP](rust-lang/rust#99160 (comment)), which also contains the motivation. Fixes rust-lang/rust#99160 Fixes rust-lang/rust#98896 (by declaring it not-a-bug) Fixes rust-lang/rust#119366 Fixes rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines#129
override user defined channel when using precompiled rustc We need to override `rust.channel` if it's manually specified when using the CI rustc. This is because if the compiler uses a different channel than the one specified in config.toml, tests may fail due to using a different channel than the one used by the compiler during tests. For more context, see rust-lang/rust#122709 (comment).
…woerister Unconditionally warn on usage of `wasm32-wasi` This commit is a continuation of the work originally proposed in rust-lang/compiler-team#607 and later amended in rust-lang/compiler-team#695. The end goal is to rename `wasm32-wasi` to `wasm32-wasip1` to reflect WASI's development and distinguish the preexisting target from the `wasm32-wasip2` target that WASI is now developing. Work for this transition began in #120468 which landed in Rust 1.78 which became stable on 2024-05-02. This implements the next phase of the transition plan to warn on usage of `wasm32-wasi`. This is intended to help alert users that a removal is pending and all release channels have the replacement available as well. This will reach stable on 2024-09-05. The next stage of the plan is to remove the `wasm32-wasi` target some time in October 2024 which means that the removal will reach stable on 2025-01-09. For reference a full schedule of this transition is listed [here]. Currently this implementation is a simple unconditional warning whenever `rustc --target wasm32-wasi` is invoked. As-implemented there's no way to turn off the warning other than to switch to the `wasm32-wasip1` target. [here]: rust-lang/rust#120468 (comment)
Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - #125447 (Allow constraining opaque types during subtyping in the trait system) - #125766 (MCDC Coverage: instrument last boolean RHS operands from condition coverage) - #125880 (Remove `src/tools/rust-demangler`) - #126154 (StorageLive: refresh storage (instead of UB) when local is already live) - #126572 (override user defined channel when using precompiled rustc) - #126662 (Unconditionally warn on usage of `wasm32-wasi`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
…r=petrochenkov
Fix duplicated attributes on nonterminal expressions
This PR fixes a long-standing bug (#86055) whereby expression attributes can be duplicated when expanded through declarative macros.
First, consider how items are parsed in declarative macros:
```
Items:
- parse_nonterminal
- parse_item(ForceCollect::Yes)
- parse_item_
- attrs = parse_outer_attributes
- parse_item_common(attrs)
- maybe_whole!
- collect_tokens_trailing_token
```
The important thing is that the parsing of outer attributes is outside token collection, so the item's tokens don't include the attributes. This is how it's supposed to be.
Now consider how expression are parsed in declarative macros:
```
Exprs:
- parse_nonterminal
- parse_expr_force_collect
- collect_tokens_no_attrs
- collect_tokens_trailing_token
- parse_expr
- parse_expr_res(None)
- parse_expr_assoc_with
- parse_expr_prefix
- parse_or_use_outer_attributes
- parse_expr_dot_or_call
```
The important thing is that the parsing of outer attributes is inside token collection, so the the expr's tokens do include the attributes, i.e. in `AttributesData::tokens`.
This PR fixes the bug by rearranging expression parsing to that outer attribute parsing happens outside of token collection. This requires a number of small refactorings because expression parsing is somewhat complicated. While doing so the PR makes the code a bit cleaner and simpler, by eliminating `parse_or_use_outer_attributes` and `Option<AttrWrapper>` arguments (in favour of the simpler `parse_outer_attributes` and `AttrWrapper` arguments), and simplifying `LhsExpr`.
r? `@petrochenkov`
Trying to address an incremental compilation issues This pull request contains two independent changes, one makes it so when `try_force_from_dep_node` fails to recover a query - it marks the node as "red" instead of "green" and the second one makes Debug impl for `DepNode` less panicky if it encounters something from the previous compilation that doesn't map to anything in the current one. I'm not 100% confident that this is the correct approach, but so far I managed to find a bunch of comments suggesting that some things are allowed to fail in a certain way and changes I made are allowing for those things to fail this way and it fixes all the small reproducers I managed to find. Compilation panic this pull request avoids is caused by an automatically generated code on an associated type and it is not happening if something else marks it as outdated first (or close like that, but scenario is quite obscure). Fixes rust-lang/rust#107226 Fixes rust-lang/rust#125367
Stabilise `c_unwind` Fix #74990 Fix #115285 (that's also where FCP is happening) Marking as draft PR for now due to `compiler_builtins` issues r? `@Amanieu`
Add std Xtensa targets support Adds std Xtensa targets. This enables using Rust on ESP32, ESP32-S2 and ESP32-S3 chips. Tier 3 policy: > A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target. (The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.) `@MabezDev,` `@ivmarkov` and I (`@SergioGasquez)` will maintain the targets. > Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust (such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important even for a tier 3 target. The target triple is consistent with other targets. > Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to disambiguate it. > If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name. Periods (.) are known to cause issues in Cargo. We follow the same naming convention as other targets. > Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for Rust developers or users. The target does not introduce any legal issues. > The target must not introduce license incompatibilities. There are no license incompatibilities > Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license (MIT OR Apache-2.0). Everything added is under that licenses > The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding new license exceptions (as specified by the tidy tool in the rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be subject to any new license requirements. Requirements are not changed for any other target. > Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other code for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling from another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries. Host tools built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications built for the target, but those libraries must not be required for code generation for the target; cross-compilation to the target must not require such libraries at all. For instance, rustc built for the target may depend on a common proprietary C runtime library or console output library, but must not depend on a proprietary code generation library or code optimization library. Rust's license permits such combinations, but the Rust project has no interest in maintaining such combinations within the scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3. The linker used by the targets is the GCC linker from the GCC toolchain cross-compiled for Xtensa. GNU GPL. > "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous" legal/licensing terms include but are not limited to: non-disclosure requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements (CLAs) or equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms, requirements conditional on the employer or employment of any particular Rust developers, revocable terms, any requirements that create liability for the Rust project or its developers or users, or any requirements that adversely affect the livelihood or prospects of the Rust project or its developers or users. No such terms exist for this target > Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise participate in discussions. > This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being cited in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or maintain support for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a developer or team responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not face any legal threats or obligations that would prevent them from freely exercising their judgment in such approval, even if such judgment involves subjective matters or goes beyond the letter of these requirements. Understood > Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets that can support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3 target not implementing those portions. The targets implement libStd almost in its entirety, except for the missing support for process, as this is a bare metal platform. The process `sys\unix` module is currently stubbed to return "not implemented" errors. > The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target, using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary. Here is how to build for the target https://docs.esp-rs.org/book/installation/riscv-and-xtensa.html and it also covers how to run binaries on the target. > Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or other developers in the community, to maintain the target. In particular, do not post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a block on the PR based on a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or notifications (via any medium, including via `@)` to a PR author or others involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into such messages. > Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested such notifications. Understood > Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2 or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3 target. > In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets, such as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the target may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as appropriate, to let each target run code supported by that target. No other targets should be affected > Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of rustc's supported backends from any host target. It can produce assembly, but it requires a custom LLVM with Xtensa support (https://github.com/espressif/llvm-project/). The patches are trying to be upstreamed (espressif/llvm-project#4)
Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - #126380 (Add std Xtensa targets support) - #126636 (Resolve Clippy `f16` and `f128` `unimplemented!`/`FIXME`s ) - #126659 (More status-quo tests for the `#[coverage(..)]` attribute) - #126711 (Make Option::as_[mut_]slice const) - #126717 (Clean up some comments near `use` declarations) - #126719 (Fix assertion failure for some `Expect` diagnostics.) - #126730 (Add opaque type corner case test) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
…eyouxu Migrate `run-make/rustdoc-io-error` to `rmake.rs` Part of rust-lang/rust#121876. r? `@jieyouxu` try-job: armhf-gnu
Replace sort implementations This PR replaces the sort implementations with tailor-made ones that strike a balance of run-time, compile-time and binary-size, yielding run-time and compile-time improvements. Regressing binary-size for `slice::sort` while improving it for `slice::sort_unstable`. All while upholding the existing soft and hard safety guarantees, and even extending the soft guarantees, detecting strict weak ordering violations with a high chance and reporting it to users via a panic. * `slice::sort` -> driftsort [design document](https://github.com/Voultapher/sort-research-rs/blob/main/writeup/driftsort_introduction/text.md), includes detailed benchmarks and analysis. * `slice::sort_unstable` -> ipnsort [design document](https://github.com/Voultapher/sort-research-rs/blob/main/writeup/ipnsort_introduction/text.md), includes detailed benchmarks and analysis. #### Why should we change the sort implementations? In the [2023 Rust survey](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/02/19/2023-Rust-Annual-Survey-2023-results.html#challenges), one of the questions was: "In your opinion, how should work on the following aspects of Rust be prioritized?". The second place was "Runtime performance" and the third one "Compile Times". This PR aims to improve both. #### Why is this one big PR and not multiple? * The current documentation gives performance recommendations for `slice::sort` and `slice::sort_unstable`. If for example only one of them were to be changed, this advice would be misleading for some Rust versions. By replacing them atomically, the advice remains largely unchanged, and users don't have to change their code. * driftsort and ipnsort share a substantial part of their implementations. * The implementation of `select_nth_unstable` uses internals of `slice::sort_unstable`, which makes it impractical to split changes. --- This PR is a collaboration with `@orlp.`
Account for things that optimize out in inlining costs This updates the MIR inlining `CostChecker` to have both bonuses and penalties, rather than just penalties. That lets us add bonuses for some things where we want to encourage inlining without risking wrapping into a gigantic cost. For example, `switchInt(const …)` we give an inlining bonus because codegen will actually eliminate the branch (and associated dead blocks) once it's monomorphized, so measuring both sides of the branch gives an unrealistically-high cost to it. Similarly, an `unreachable` terminator gets a small bonus, because whatever branch leads there doesn't actually exist post-codegen.
|
@bors r+ |
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.