Rollup of 8 pull requests #151617
Closed
Rollup of 8 pull requests #151617
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
… duration under Win7 Fixes rust-lang#149935. See the added comment for more details. Signed-off-by: Paul Mabileau <paul.mabileau@harfanglab.fr>
The links are correct, but text typoed `as_array_mut`.
This fixes stage1 builds when the proc-macro bridge api changed. The rustc_proc_macro crate is identical to the proc_macro that would end up in the sysroot of the rustc compiler rustc_proc_macro is linked into.
They break whenever the proc macro ABI changes due to it building a proc macro against the bootstrap sysroot.
It is a singleton which doesn't actually need to be passed through over the bridge.
And rename FreeFunctions struct to Methods.
…ulacrum Add codegen test for removing trailing zeroes from `NonZero` Closes rust-lang#138497
std: avoid tearing `dbg!` prints Fixes rust-lang#136703. This is an alternative to rust-lang#149859. Instead of formatting everything into a string, this PR makes multi-expression `dbg!` expand into multiple nested matches, with the final match containing a single `eprint!`. By using macro recursion and relying on hygiene, this allows naming every bound value in that `eprint!`. CC @orlp r? libs
…, r=Mark-Simulacrum add CSE optimization tests for iterating over slice This PR is regression test for issue rust-lang#119573. This PR introduces a new regression test to verify a critical optimization known as Common Subexpression Elimination (CSE) is correctly applied during various slice iteration patterns.
…r=Mark-Simulacrum Fix(lib/win/thread): Ensure `Sleep`'s usage passes over the requested duration under Win7 Fixes rust-lang#149935. See the added comment for more details. This makes the concerned test now reproducibly pass, for us at least. Also, testing this separately revealed successful: see the issue. @rustbot label C-bug I-flaky-test O-windows-7 T-libs A-time A-thread
…ulacrum Refine dummy_span.rs test The test that is introduced in rust-lang#128627 is a BBs order problem in LLVM. I'm not 100% confident in the following investigation, but I think this is presumably the result. Per the following content that is mentioned at https://llvm.org/docs/KeyInstructionsDebugInfo.html: > DWARF provides a helpful tool the compiler can employ to mitigate this jumpiness, the `is_stmt` flag, which indicates that an instruction is a recommended breakpoint location. However, LLVM’s current approach to deciding `is_stmt` placement essentially reduces down to “is the associated line number different to the previous instruction’s?”. Taking the example from https://rust.godbolt.org/z/GvToxj6vh. The partial assembly code with `SimplifyComparisonIntegral` is: ```asm .LBB40_21: .loc 6 14 16 is_stmt 1 ; RET = Ok(()) mov byte ptr [rsp + 79], 5 .loc 6 0 0 is_stmt 0 jmp .LBB40_23 ... .LBB40_23: .loc 6 18 1 is_stmt 1 lea rdi, [rsp + 112] ; drop(number_str) call qword ptr [rip + core[270d1373c8f6a07d]::ptr::drop_in_place::<alloc[206d51544a00c3e8]::string::String>@GOTPCREL] jmp .LBB40_27 ``` without `SimplifyComparisonIntegral`: ```asm .LBB40_22: .loc 6 14 16 is_stmt 1 ; RET = Ok(()) mov byte ptr [rsp + 79], 5 .loc 6 0 0 is_stmt 0 jmp .LBB40_27 ... .LBB40_26: .loc 6 18 2 is_stmt 0 mov al, byte ptr [rsp + 79] .loc 6 18 2 epilogue_begin add rsp, 360 .cfi_def_cfa_offset 8 ret .LBB40_27: ; same line number to the previous instruction, so don't place `is_stmt` flag. ; this flag is `is_stmt 0` that will follow the flag of `.LBB40_26`. .loc 6 18 1 lea rdi, [rsp + 112] ; drop(number_str) call qword ptr [rip + core[270d1373c8f6a07d]::ptr::drop_in_place::<alloc[206d51544a00c3e8]::string::String>@GOTPCREL] jmp .LBB40_26 ``` GDB doesn't step to `LBB40_27` due to `is_stmt 0`, so the next step is `__rust_begin_short_backtrace`. I have verified the new test works well with or without ``SimplifyComparisonIntegral`.
…rochenkov,Kobzol Various refactors to the proc_macro bridge This reduces the amount of types, traits and other abstractions that are involved with the bridge, which should make it easier to understand and modify. This should also help a bit with getting rid of the type marking hack, which is complicating the code a fair bit. Fixes: rust-lang#139810
…ark-Simulacrum relnotes: fix 1.93's `as_mut_array` methods The links are correct, but text typoed `as_array_mut`.
Rename `DepKindStruct` to `DepKindVTable` This type is used by dependency-tracking code in the query system, for looking up function pointers and other metadata associated with a particular `DepKind`. Calling it “struct” is not particularly helpful, whereas calling it a “vtable” at least gives some basic intuition for what it is and how it is used. Some associated identifiers have also drifted a bit over time, and this PR adjusts those as well. There should be no change to compiler behaviour. r? nnethercote (or compiler)
rustbot
added
A-query-system
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Member
Author
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=5 |
Contributor
rust-bors
bot
added
S-waiting-on-bors
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
rust-bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 25, 2026
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #145393 (Add codegen test for removing trailing zeroes from `NonZero`) - #149869 (std: avoid tearing `dbg!` prints) - #150065 (add CSE optimization tests for iterating over slice) - #150842 (Fix(lib/win/thread): Ensure `Sleep`'s usage passes over the requested duration under Win7) - #151244 (Refine dummy_span.rs test) - #151505 (Various refactors to the proc_macro bridge) - #151560 (relnotes: fix 1.93's `as_mut_array` methods) - #151577 (Rename `DepKindStruct` to `DepKindVTable`)
Collaborator
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
rust-bors
bot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Contributor
|
💔 Test for bf28e9e failed: CI. Failed job:
|
rustbot
removed
the
S-waiting-on-review
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
12 participants
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.
Successful merges:
NonZero#145393 (Add codegen test for removing trailing zeroes fromNonZero)dbg!prints #149869 (std: avoid tearingdbg!prints)Sleep's usage passes over the requested duration under Win7 #150842 (Fix(lib/win/thread): EnsureSleep's usage passes over the requested duration under Win7)as_mut_arraymethods #151560 (relnotes: fix 1.93'sas_mut_arraymethods)DepKindStructtoDepKindVTable#151577 (RenameDepKindStructtoDepKindVTable)r? @ghost
Create a similar rollup