| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
r=alexcrichton"
This reverts commit 7870050796e5904a0fc85ecbe6fa6dde1cfe0c91, reversing
changes made to 2e7244807a7878f6eca3eb7d97ae9b413aa49014.
|
|
|
|
Intrinsics can only be defined by the compiler.
|
|
Move promoted MIR out of `mir::Body`
r? @oli-obk
|
|
This reverts commit b4a6f597934f16f89e27058a32a514c9572f148f.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/60532
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
compiletest: Introduce `// {check,build,run}-pass` pass modes
Pass UI tests now have three modes
```
// check-pass
// build-pass
// run-pass
```
mirroring equivalent well-known `cargo` commands.
`// check-pass` will compile the test skipping codegen (which is expensive and isn't supposed to fail in most cases).
`// build-pass` will compile and link the test without running it.
`// run-pass` will compile, link and run the test.
Tests without a "pass" annotation are still considered "fail" tests.
Most UI tests would probably want to switch to `check-pass`.
Tests validating codegen would probably want to run the generated code as well and use `run-pass`.
`build-pass` should probably be rare (linking tests?).
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/61755 will provide a way to run the tests with any mode, e.g. bump `check-pass` tests to `run-pass` to satisfy especially suspicious people, and be able to make sure that codegen doesn't breaks in some entirely unexpected way.
Tests marked with any mode are expected to pass with any other mode, if that's not the case for some legitimate reason, then the test should be made a "fail" test rather than a "pass" test.
Perhaps some secondary CI can verify this invariant, but that's not super urgent.
`// compile-pass` still works and is equivalent to `build-pass`.
Why is `// compile-pass` bad - 1) it gives an impression that the test is only compiled, but not linked, 2) it doesn't mirror a cargo command.
It can be removed some time in the future in a separate PR.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61712
|
|
|
|
`ByRef` const values have no identity beyond their value, we should not treat them as having identity. The `AllocId` often differed between equal constants, because of the way that the miri-engine evaluates constants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fix incremental compilation of cdylib emitting spurious unused_attributes lint
fixes #60050
|
|
Added ignore-sgx for appropriate tests in src/test
These are all the tests that make sense to ignore when targeting fortanix-unknonw-sgx, at least in test/runpass. Other suites not yet covered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[let_chains, 1/6] Remove hir::ExprKind::If
Per https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/53667#issuecomment-471583239.
r? @oli-obk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disallow double trailing newlines in tidy
This wasn't done previously in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/47064#issuecomment-354533010 as it affected too many files, but I think it's best to fix it now so that the number of files with double trailing newlines doesn't keep increasing.
r? kennytm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rustc_scalar_valid_range_{start,end}.
|
|
|
|
|
|
names
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Update: Fixed test; revision is meant to introduce compile-failure, w/o ICE.)
|
|
rustc: Implement incremental "fat" LTO
Currently the compiler will produce an error if both incremental
compilation and full fat LTO is requested. With recent changes and the
advent of incremental ThinLTO, however, all the hard work is already
done for us and it's actually not too bad to remove this error!
This commit updates the codegen backend to allow incremental full fat
LTO. The semantics are that the input modules to LTO are all produce
incrementally, but the final LTO step is always done unconditionally
regardless of whether the inputs changed or not. The only real
incremental win we could have here is if zero of the input modules
changed, but that's so rare it's unlikely to be worthwhile to implement
such a code path.
cc #57968
cc rust-lang/cargo#6643
|
|
Fix #54242
r? @michaelwoerister
|
|
Currently the compiler will produce an error if both incremental
compilation and full fat LTO is requested. With recent changes and the
advent of incremental ThinLTO, however, all the hard work is already
done for us and it's actually not too bad to remove this error!
This commit updates the codegen backend to allow incremental full fat
LTO. The semantics are that the input modules to LTO are all produce
incrementally, but the final LTO step is always done unconditionally
regardless of whether the inputs changed or not. The only real
incremental win we could have here is if zero of the input modules
changed, but that's so rare it's unlikely to be worthwhile to implement
such a code path.
cc #57968
cc rust-lang/cargo#6643
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This commit moves well-formedness check for the
`UserTypeAnnotation::Ty(..)` case from always running to only when the
code is reachable. This solves the ICE that resulted from
`src/test/ui/issue-54943-1.rs` (a minimal repro of `dropck-eyepatch`
run-pass tests that failed).
The main well-formedness check that was intended to be run despite
unreachable code still is, that being the
`UserTypeAnnotation::TypeOf(..)` case. Before this PR, the other case
wasn't being checked at all.
It is possible to fix this ICE while still always checking
well-formedness for the `UserTypeAnnotation::Ty(..)` case but that
solution will ICE in unreachable code for that case, the diff for
that change [can be found here](0).
[0]: https://gist.github.com/davidtwco/f9751ffd9c0508f7251c0f17adc3af53
|
|
|
