Rollup of 12 pull requests #147574
Merged
Rollup of 12 pull requests #147574
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
Co-authored-by: David Tolnay <[email protected]>
This is the target for 32-bit Cortex-A bare-metal, when using the FPU. The target is well tested by the Embedded Devices Working Group, and the soft-float target (armv7a-none-eabi) is already Tier 2.
This is the target for supporting Arm Cortex-R52 bare-metal systems, which are common in safety-critical systems.
…als that are not in debuginfo
Regression test for const promotion with Option<Ordering> https://rust.godbolt.org/z/EjxqE8WcT Fixes rust-lang#139093 Add a regression test to ensure that comparing `Option<Ordering>` to `Some(Ordering::Equal)` does not trigger unnecessary const promotion in MIR. Previously, inlined constants like `Some(Ordering::Equal)` would get promoted, leading to more complex MIR and redundant LLVM IR checks. This test verifies that both the direct form and the `let`-binding form now generate equivalent, simplified MIR. r? cjgillot
…, r=dtolnay
implement Extend<{Group, Literal, Punct, Ident}> for TokenStream
Tracking issue: rust-lang#112815
…, r=petrochenkov Promote armv8r-none-eabihf target to Tier 2 This PR promotes armv8r-none-eabihf to Tier 2, joining armv7r-none-eabi, armv7r-none-eabihf and armv7a-none-eabi. This PR wil be rebased once rust-lang#146419 completes the queue. > - A tier 2 target must have value to people other than its maintainers. (It may > still be a niche target, but it must not be exclusively useful for an > inherently closed group.) The `armv8r-none-eabihf` target is for the Arm Cortex-R52 processor, as found in a number of Automotive SoCs that have just been released, or are about to be released. Currently SoCs are available from NXP and Renesas. >- A tier 2 target must have a designated team of developers (the "target > maintainers") available to consult on target-specific build-breaking issues, > or if necessary to develop target-specific language or library implementation > details. This team must have at least 2 developers. The Embedded Devices Working Group's Arm Team have just started maintaining this target. > - The target must not place undue burden on Rust developers not specifically > concerned with that target. Rust developers are expected to not gratuitously > break a tier 2 target, but are not expected to become experts in every tier 2 > target, and are not expected to provide target-specific implementations for > every tier 2 target. This target is highly similar to a number of existing Tier 2 targets, including `armv7r-none-eabihf` and so it should not add undue burden. > - The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how > to build for the target using cross-compilation, and explaining how to run > tests for the target. If at all possible, this documentation should show how > to run Rust programs and tests for the target using emulation, to allow > anyone to do so. If the target cannot be feasibly emulated, the documentation > should explain how to obtain and work with physical hardware, cloud systems, > or equivalent. https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/rustc/platform-support/armv8r-none-eabihf.html exists and was updated in rust-lang#146419 > - The target must document its baseline expectations for the features or > versions of CPUs, operating systems, libraries, runtime environments, and > similar. I believe it does. > - If introducing a new tier 2 or higher target that is identical to an existing > Rust target except for the baseline expectations for the features or versions > of CPUs, operating systems, libraries, runtime environments, and similar, > then the proposed target must document to the satisfaction of the approving > teams why the specific difference in baseline expectations provides > sufficient value to justify a separate target. The Armv8-R architecture introduces a new FPU type, the fp-armv8, and so this requires a unique target. > - Tier 2 targets must not leave any significant portions of `core` or the > standard library unimplemented or stubbed out, unless they cannot possibly be > supported on the target. It has a full libcore, as per the other arm*-none-* targets. > - The code generation backend for the target should not have deficiencies that > invalidate Rust safety properties, as evaluated by the Rust compiler team. It should be the same backend as `armv7r-none-eabihf` and friends, except for FPU support, which is already covered in `thumbv8m.main-none-eabihf`. There are no issues that I know of. > - If the target supports C code, and the target has an interoperable calling > convention for C code, the Rust target must support that C calling convention > for the platform via `extern "C"`. The C calling convention does not need to > be the default Rust calling convention for the target, however. The ABI is EABI, the same as many other Arm targets. > - The target must build reliably in CI, for all components that Rust's CI > considers mandatory. The https://github.com/rust-embedded/cortex-ar repository regularly builds this target with `-Zbuild-std=core` and it seems fine. > - The approving teams may additionally require that a subset of tests pass in > CI, such as enough to build a functional "hello world" program, `./x.py test > --no-run`, or equivalent "smoke tests". In particular, this requirement may > apply if the target builds host tools, or if the tests in question provide > substantial value via early detection of critical problems. There are no no-std tests in the tree that I'm aware of. > - Building the target in CI must not take substantially longer than the current > slowest target in CI, and should not substantially raise the maintenance > burden of the CI infrastructure. This requirement is subjective, to be > evaluated by the infrastructure team, and will take the community importance > of the target into account. Building libcore is quite fast. > - Tier 2 targets should, if at all possible, support cross-compiling. Tier 2 > targets should not require using the target as the host for builds, even if > the target supports host tools. It does. > - In addition to the legal requirements for all targets (specified in the tier > 3 requirements), because a tier 2 target typically involves the Rust project > building and supplying various compiled binaries, incorporating the target > and redistributing any resulting compiled binaries (e.g. built libraries, > host tools if any) must not impose any onerous license requirements on any > members of the Rust project, including infrastructure team members and those > operating CI systems. This is a subjective requirement, to be evaluated by > the approving teams. Just libcore required (and liballoc). No known issues here. > - Tier 2 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or > other developers in the community, to ensure that tests pass for the target. Noted > - The target maintainers should regularly run the testsuite for the target The https://github.com/rust-embedded/cortex-ar repository will be changed to use the rustup component when available. > and should fix any test failures in a reasonably timely fashion. Noted
…hf, r=petrochenkov Promote armv7a-none-eabihf to Tier 2 This PR promotes armv7a-none-eabihf to Tier 2, to join armv7r-none-eabihf and armv7a-none-eabi. I believe it was simply an oversight that it wasn't made Tier 2 before, as most Armv7-A targets have an FPU and it often makes sense to use it. This PR wil be rebased once rust-lang#146419 completes the queue. > - A tier 2 target must have value to people other than its maintainers. (It may > still be a niche target, but it must not be exclusively useful for an > inherently closed group.) The `armv7a-none-eabihf` target is for all Arm Cortex-A processors (either 32-bit only, or in 32-bit mode) where the user wants to use the FPU. >- A tier 2 target must have a designated team of developers (the "target > maintainers") available to consult on target-specific build-breaking issues, > or if necessary to develop target-specific language or library implementation > details. This team must have at least 2 developers. The Embedded Devices Working Group's Arm Team have just started maintaining this target. > - The target must not place undue burden on Rust developers not specifically > concerned with that target. Rust developers are expected to not gratuitously > break a tier 2 target, but are not expected to become experts in every tier 2 > target, and are not expected to provide target-specific implementations for > every tier 2 target. This target is highly similar to a number of existing Tier 2 targets, including `armv7r-none-eabihf` and `armv7a-none-eabi` and so it should not add undue burden. > - The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how > to build for the target using cross-compilation, and explaining how to run > tests for the target. If at all possible, this documentation should show how > to run Rust programs and tests for the target using emulation, to allow > anyone to do so. If the target cannot be feasibly emulated, the documentation > should explain how to obtain and work with physical hardware, cloud systems, > or equivalent. https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/rustc/platform-support/armv7a-none-eabi.html was added in rust-lang#146419. It covers the `-eabi` and the `-eabihf` targets. > - The target must document its baseline expectations for the features or > versions of CPUs, operating systems, libraries, runtime environments, and > similar. I believe it does. > - If introducing a new tier 2 or higher target that is identical to an existing > Rust target except for the baseline expectations for the features or versions > of CPUs, operating systems, libraries, runtime environments, and similar, > then the proposed target must document to the satisfaction of the approving > teams why the specific difference in baseline expectations provides > sufficient value to justify a separate target. It uses very similar FPUs to `armv7r-none-eabihf` but is otherwise the same as `armv7a-none-eabi`. > - Tier 2 targets must not leave any significant portions of `core` or the > standard library unimplemented or stubbed out, unless they cannot possibly be > supported on the target. It has a full libcore, as per the other arm*-none-* targets. > - The code generation backend for the target should not have deficiencies that > invalidate Rust safety properties, as evaluated by the Rust compiler team. It should be the same backend as `armv7r-none-eabihf` and friends, except for FPU support, which is already covered in `thumbv8m.main-none-eabihf`. There are no issues that I know of. > - If the target supports C code, and the target has an interoperable calling > convention for C code, the Rust target must support that C calling convention > for the platform via `extern "C"`. The C calling convention does not need to > be the default Rust calling convention for the target, however. The ABI is EABI, the same as many other Arm targets. > - The target must build reliably in CI, for all components that Rust's CI > considers mandatory. The https://github.com/rust-embedded/cortex-ar repository has been changed in rust-embedded/cortex-ar#57 to build this target with `-Zbuild-std=core`. Locally it seems fine. > - The approving teams may additionally require that a subset of tests pass in > CI, such as enough to build a functional "hello world" program, `./x.py test > --no-run`, or equivalent "smoke tests". In particular, this requirement may > apply if the target builds host tools, or if the tests in question provide > substantial value via early detection of critical problems. There are no no-std tests in the tree that I'm aware of. > - Building the target in CI must not take substantially longer than the current > slowest target in CI, and should not substantially raise the maintenance > burden of the CI infrastructure. This requirement is subjective, to be > evaluated by the infrastructure team, and will take the community importance > of the target into account. Building libcore is quite fast. > - Tier 2 targets should, if at all possible, support cross-compiling. Tier 2 > targets should not require using the target as the host for builds, even if > the target supports host tools. It does. > - In addition to the legal requirements for all targets (specified in the tier > 3 requirements), because a tier 2 target typically involves the Rust project > building and supplying various compiled binaries, incorporating the target > and redistributing any resulting compiled binaries (e.g. built libraries, > host tools if any) must not impose any onerous license requirements on any > members of the Rust project, including infrastructure team members and those > operating CI systems. This is a subjective requirement, to be evaluated by > the approving teams. Just libcore required (and liballoc). No known issues here. > - Tier 2 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or > other developers in the community, to ensure that tests pass for the target. Noted > - The target maintainers should regularly run the testsuite for the target The https://github.com/rust-embedded/cortex-ar repository will be changed to use the rustup component when available. > and should fix any test failures in a reasonably timely fashion. Noted
…w-mitigate, r=joboet Mitigate `thread_local!` shadowing issues Mitigates rust-lang#147006 and rust-lang#99018. `@rustbot` label T-libs A-macros A-thread-locals A-hygiene
…ethercote Update rustc-perf submodule To bring in rust-lang/rustc-perf#2274, rust-lang/rustc-perf#2275 and rust-lang/rustc-perf#2276. r? `@nnethercote` try-job: dist-x86_64-linux try-job: dist-x86_64-msvc
compiletest: Use the same directive lines for EarlyProps and ignore/only/needs Currently we load each discovered test file to scan it for directives once for EarlyProps parsing, then reload and scan it once *per revision* for ignore processing. If a revision is not ignored, we then reload and scan it again during actual execution. That's a bit silly, so this PR tries to reduce the number of unnecessary file loads and line scans for directive parsing, by reusing the same collection of `DirectiveLine` values for EarlyProps and for each revision's ignores. Each individual directive still needs to be re-parsed a bunch of times, but those steps can at least avoid scanning the whole file, or having to split out names from values. --- There's more that could be done after this, such as only doing known-directive checks once per file, or embedding file paths in each `DirectiveLine`, but I decided to stop here to allow review in modest chunks. r? jieyouxu
Replace locals in debuginfo records during ref_prop and dest_prop Fixes rust-lang#147485. r? cjgillot
Remove StatementKind::Deinit. It is a remnant from the time we deaggreated MIR. Now, it is only constructed by the `LargeEnums` MIR pass, which is disabled by default.
…-checks, r=Amanieu remove `#[rustc_inherit_overflow_checks]` from `is_multiple_of` Most likely this was just a result of copy-pasting. The attribute has no effect, because `%` always uses overflow checks. r? `@Amanieu` cc `@RalfJung`
…nkov Move `wasm32-wasip3` to the tier 3 table rust-lang#147205 says it wanted to add this as a tier 3 target but accidentally added it to the tier 2 table.
…iv_ceil, r=joboet Stabilize `NonZero<u*>::div_ceil` As per rust-lang#132968 (comment) r? libs
rustbot
added
A-testsuite
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=5 |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 10, 2025
Rollup of 12 pull requests Successful merges: - #145651 (Regression test for const promotion with Option<Ordering>) - #145722 (implement Extend<{Group, Literal, Punct, Ident}> for TokenStream) - #146520 (Promote armv8r-none-eabihf target to Tier 2) - #146522 (Promote armv7a-none-eabihf to Tier 2) - #147289 (Mitigate `thread_local!` shadowing issues) - #147515 (Update rustc-perf submodule) - #147522 (compiletest: Use the same directive lines for EarlyProps and ignore/only/needs) - #147525 (Replace locals in debuginfo records during ref_prop and dest_prop) - #147544 (Remove StatementKind::Deinit.) - #147551 (remove `#[rustc_inherit_overflow_checks]` from `is_multiple_of`) - #147553 (Move `wasm32-wasip3` to the tier 3 table) - #147562 (Stabilize `NonZero<u*>::div_ceil`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors retry (clang: error: unsupported option '-print-multi-os-directory') |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
What is this?This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.Comparing b3f8586 (parent) -> 4422885 (this PR) Test differencesShow 1050 test diffsStage 1
Stage 2
Additionally, 1040 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy. Job group index
Test dashboardRun cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
test-dashboard 442288534b6cf9ec4899b00c4332433b17760d96 --output-dir test-dashboardAnd then open Job duration changes
How to interpret the job duration changes?Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance |
|
📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:
previous master: b3f8586fb1 In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (4422885): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary -0.2%, secondary -1.3%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 473.801s -> 473.161s (-0.14%) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
15 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:
thread_local!shadowing issues #147289 (Mitigatethread_local!shadowing issues)#[rustc_inherit_overflow_checks]fromis_multiple_of#147551 (remove#[rustc_inherit_overflow_checks]fromis_multiple_of)wasm32-wasip3to the tier 3 table #147553 (Movewasm32-wasip3to the tier 3 table)NonZero<u*>::div_ceil#147562 (StabilizeNonZero<u*>::div_ceil)r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup