Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Contracts & Harnesses for unchecked_mul , unchecked_sub, unchecked_shl and unchecked_shr - #96
Merged
carolynzech merged 55 commits intoOct 7, 2024
Conversation
…ints' into c-0011-core-nums-junfengj-unchecked-shl
…nums-lanfeima-unsafe-ints
unchecked_mul and unchecked_shrunchecked_mul , unchecked_shl and unchecked_shr…nums-lanfeima-unsafe-ints
celinval
reviewed
Oct 7, 2024
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
rajathkotyal
commented
Oct 7, 2024
Author
Hi @celinval , Could we get the workflows approved? Thanks! |
unchecked_mul , unchecked_shl and unchecked_shrunchecked_mul , unchecked_sub, unchecked_shl and unchecked_shrcelinval
commented
Oct 7, 2024
@rajathkotyal we need a second reviewer to approve this PR. Maybe @carolynzech? |
carolynzech
enabled auto-merge (squash)
October 7, 2024 18:08
tautschnig pushed a commit
to tautschnig/verify-rust-std
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 29, 2025
Introduce and use specialized `//@ ignore-auxiliary` for test support files instead of using `//@ ignore-test` ### Summary Add a semantically meaningful directive for ignoring test *auxiliary* files. This is for auxiliary files that *participate* in actual tests but should not be built by `compiletest` (i.e. these files are involved through `mod xxx;` or `include!()` or `#[path = "xxx"]`, etc.). ### Motivation A specialized directive like `//@ ignore-auxiliary` makes it way easier to audit disabled tests via `//@ ignore-test`. - These support files cannot use the canonical `auxiliary/` dir because they participate in module resolution or are included, or their relative paths can be important for test intention otherwise. Follow-up to: - rust-lang#139705 - rust-lang#139783 - rust-lang#139740 See also discussions in: - [#t-compiler > Directive name for non-test aux files?](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/131828-t-compiler/topic/Directive.20name.20for.20non-test.20aux.20files.3F/with/512773817) - [#t-compiler > Handling disabled &model-checking#96;//@ ignore-test&model-checking#96; tests](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/131828-t-compiler/topic/Handling.20disabled.20.60.2F.2F.40.20ignore-test.60.20tests/with/512005974) - [#t-compiler/meetings > &model-checking#91;steering&model-checking#93; 2025-04-11 Dealing with disabled tests](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/238009-t-compiler.2Fmeetings/topic/.5Bsteering.5D.202025-04-11.20Dealing.20with.20disabled.20tests/with/511717981) ### Remarks on remaining unconditionally disabled tests under `tests/` After this PR, against commit 79a272c, only **14** remaining test files are disabled through `//@ ignore-test`: <details> <summary>Remaining `//@ ignore-test` files under `tests/`</summary> ``` tests/debuginfo/drop-locations.rs 4://@ ignore-test (broken, see rust-lang#128971) tests/rustdoc/macro-document-private-duplicate.rs 1://@ ignore-test (fails spuriously, see issue rust-lang#89228) tests/rustdoc/inline_cross/assoc-const-equality.rs 3://@ ignore-test (FIXME: rust-lang#125092) tests/ui/match/issue-27021.rs 7://@ ignore-test (rust-lang#54987) tests/ui/match/issue-26996.rs 7://@ ignore-test (rust-lang#54987) tests/ui/issues/issue-49298.rs 9://@ ignore-test (rust-lang#54987) tests/ui/issues/issue-59756.rs 2://@ ignore-test (rustfix needs multiple suggestions) tests/ui/precondition-checks/write.rs 5://@ ignore-test (unimplemented) tests/ui/precondition-checks/read.rs 5://@ ignore-test (unimplemented) tests/ui/precondition-checks/write_bytes.rs 5://@ ignore-test (unimplemented) tests/ui/explicit-tail-calls/drop-order.rs 2://@ ignore-test: tail calls are not implemented in rustc_codegen_ssa yet, so this causes 🧊 tests/ui/panics/panic-short-backtrace-windows-x86_64.rs 3://@ ignore-test (rust-lang#92000) tests/ui/json/json-bom-plus-crlf-multifile-aux.rs 3://@ ignore-test Not a test. Used by other tests tests/ui/traits/next-solver/object-soundness-requires-generalization.rs 2://@ ignore-test (see rust-lang#114196) ``` </details> Of these, most are either **unimplemented**, or **spurious**, or **known-broken**. The outstanding one is `tests/ui/json/json-bom-plus-crlf-multifile-aux.rs` which I did not want to touch in *this* PR -- that aux file has load-bearing BOM and carriage returns and byte offset matters. I think those test files that require special encoding / BOM probably are better off as `run-make` tests. See rust-lang#139968 for that aux file. ### Review advice - Best reviewed commit-by-commit. - The directive name diverged from the most voted `//@ auxiliary` because I think that's easy to confuse with `//@ aux-{crate,dir}`. r? compiler
github-actionsBot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 11, 2025
…m, r=tgross35
Always use the pure Rust fallback instead of `llvm.{maximum,minimum}`
While llvm/llvm-project#142170 was merged, it was reverted and next attempt (llvm/llvm-project#140193) at fixing the LLVM implementation seems to have stall, so let's reverted back to pure Rust with the LLVM codegen.
cc [#t-compiler/llvm > `llvm.minimum`/`llvm.maximum` issues @ 💬](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/187780-t-compiler.2Fllvm/topic/.60llvm.2Eminimum.60.2F.60llvm.2Emaximum.60.20issues/near/527044712)
Fixesrust-lang#141087
r? `@tgross35`btj pushed a commit
to btj/verify-rust-std
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 22, 2025
…_collision, r=petrochenkov Prevent name collisions with internal implementation details The implementation of the linkage attribute inside extern blocks defines symbols starting with _rust_extern_with_linkage_. If someone tries to also define this symbol you will get a symbol conflict or even an ICE. By adding an unpredictable component to the symbol name, this becomes less of an issue. Spawned from the discussion at [#t-compiler > About static variables &model-checking#96;_rust_extern_with_linkage_&model-checking#42;&model-checking#96;](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/131828-t-compiler/topic/About.20static.20variables.20.60_rust_extern_with_linkage_*.60) cc `@ywxt` Fixesrust-lang#144940
btj pushed a commit
to btj/verify-rust-std
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 22, 2025
…ikic Stop using uadd.with.overflow As discussed in [#t-compiler/llvm > &model-checking#96;uadd.with.overflow&model-checking#96; (again) @ 💬](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/187780-t-compiler.2Fllvm/topic/.60uadd.2Ewith.2Eoverflow.60.20.28again.29/near/533041085), stop emitting `uadd.with.overflow` in favour of `add`+`icmp` instead. r? nikic
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
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
6 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.
Towards : issue #59
Parent branch : c-0011-core-nums-yenyunw-unsafe-ints - Tracking PR #91