Skip to content

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

yoshuawuyts and others added 15 commits June 30, 2022 17:22
When moving this to rustbuild, I introduced a bug: if you had the file already downloaded, but
deleted the sysroot for whatever reason, rustbuil would fail to unpack the cached tarball.

This only affects people if they have a cached tarball, which is probably why we haven't seen an issue yet -
wiping `build/cache` would work around the issue, or just not deleting `build/$TARGET/stage2`.
Formerly `-Zterminal-width`, `--terminal-width` allows the user or build
tool to inform rustc of the width of the terminal so that diagnostics
can be truncated.

Signed-off-by: David Wood <[email protected]>
Rename the `--terminal-width` flag to `--output-width` as the behaviour
doesn't just apply to terminals (and so is slightly less accurate).

Signed-off-by: David Wood <[email protected]>
Rename the `--output-width` flag to `--diagnostic-width` as this appears
to be the preferred name within the compiler team.

Signed-off-by: David Wood <[email protected]>
This lint seems to have been broken by rust-lang#98446
…ion, r=oli-obk

sess: stabilize `--terminal-width` as `--diagnostic-width`

Formerly `-Zterminal-width`, `--terminal-width` allows the user or build
tool to inform rustc of the width of the terminal so that diagnostics
can be truncated.

Pending agreement to stabilize, see tracking issue at rust-lang#84673.

r? ```@oli-obk```
…r=yaahc

Stabilize `into_future`

rust-lang#67644 has been labeled with [S-tracking-ready-to-stabilize](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/labels/S-tracking-ready-to-stabilize) - which mentions someone needs to file a stabilization PR. So hence this PR! ✨ Thanks!

Closes rust-lang#67644

r? ``@joshtriplett``
…anup, r=compiler-errors

A few cleanups

Each commit is (mostly) self-explanatory. These changes have come as I try to remove `ReEmpty` (rust-lang#98559).
…k-Simulacrum

Fix caching bug in `download-rustc = true`

When moving this to rustbuild, I introduced a bug: if you had the file already downloaded, but
deleted the sysroot for whatever reason, rustbuil would fail to unpack the cached tarball.

This only affects people if they have a cached tarball, which is probably why we haven't seen an issue yet -
wiping `build/cache` would work around the issue, or just not deleting `build/$TARGET/stage2`.

Fixes the following error:
```
thread 'main' panicked at 'fs::read_dir(&lib_dir) failed with No such file or directory (os error 2) ("/home/jnelson/rust-lang/rust2/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/ci-rustc/lib")', config.rs:1563:20
```

r? ``@Mark-Simulacrum``
Add test for and fix rust-lang/rust-clippy#9131

This lint seems to have been broken by rust-lang#98446 -- but of course, there was no clippy test for this case at the time.

`expr.span.ctxt().outer_expn_data()` now has `MacroKind::Derive` instead of `MacroKind::Attr` for something like:

```
#[derive(Clone, Debug)]
pub struct UnderscoreInStruct {
    _foo: u32,
}
```

---

changelog: none

closes: rust-lang/rust-clippy#9131
@rustbot rustbot added T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Jul 8, 2022
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=6

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 8, 2022

📌 Commit 445702d has been approved by matthiaskrgr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@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 Jul 8, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 8, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 445702d with merge 0f97e02...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 8, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing 0f97e02 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jul 8, 2022
@bors bors merged commit 0f97e02 into rust-lang:master Jul 8, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.64.0 milestone Jul 8, 2022
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (0f97e02): comparison url.

Instruction count

  • Primary benchmarks: no relevant changes found
  • Secondary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regressions found
mean1 max count2
Regressions 😿
(primary)
N/A N/A 0
Regressions 😿
(secondary)
1.9% 4.0% 13
Improvements 🎉
(primary)
N/A N/A 0
Improvements 🎉
(secondary)
N/A N/A 0
All 😿🎉 (primary) N/A N/A 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results
  • Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvement 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)
-0.2% -0.2% 1
Improvements 🎉
(secondary)
N/A N/A 0
All 😿🎉 (primary) -0.2% -0.2% 1

Cycles

Results
  • Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvement found
  • Secondary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regressions found
mean1 max count2
Regressions 😿
(primary)
N/A N/A 0
Regressions 😿
(secondary)
3.8% 4.5% 2
Improvements 🎉
(primary)
-3.4% -3.4% 1
Improvements 🎉
(secondary)
N/A N/A 0
All 😿🎉 (primary) -3.4% -3.4% 1

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

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

Footnotes

  1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change 2 3

  2. number of relevant changes 2 3

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression Performance regression. label Jul 8, 2022
@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

Looks to be a genuine regression, far exceeding the noise bound for the deeply-nested-multi benchmark. (This is the 4% spike on that graph).

Maybe caused by #98795? That looks to be moving some potentially sensitive code around, maybe needs some inlining help. cc @jackh726

@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr deleted the rollup-01vn70s branch July 30, 2022 10:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. 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. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

False positive on used_underscore_binding