Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Rollup of 8 pull requests - #110252
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Receiver disconnection relies on the incorrect assumption that `head.index != tail.index` implies that the channel is initialized (i.e `head.block` and `tail.block` point to allocated blocks). However, it can happen that `head.index != tail.index` and `head.block == null` at the same time which leads to a segfault when a channel is dropped in that state. This can happen because initialization is performed in two steps. First, the tail block is allocated and the `tail.block` is set. If that is successful `head.block` is set to the same pointer. Importantly, initialization is skipped if `tail.block` is not null. Therefore we can have the following situation: 1. Thread A starts to send the first value of the channel, observes that `tail.block` is null and begins initialization. It sets `tail.block` to point to a newly allocated block and then gets preempted. `head.block` is still null at this point. 2. Thread B starts to send the second value of the channel, observes that `tail.block` *is not* null and proceeds with writing its value in the allocated tail block and sets `tail.index` to 1. 3. Thread B drops the receiver of the channel which observes that `head.index != tail.index` (0 and 1 respectively), therefore there must be messages to drop. It starts traversing the linked list from `head.block` which is still a null pointer, leading to a segfault. This PR fixes this problem by waiting for initialization to complete when `head.index != tail.index` and the `head.block` is still null. A similar check exists in `start_recv` for similar reasons. Fixesrust-lang#110001 Signed-off-by: Petros Angelatos <petrosagg@gmail.com>
… literals" Reverts PR rust-lang#108031 Fixes (doesnt close until beta backported) rust-lang#109746 This reverts commit e3f9db5. This reverts commit 98b82ae. This reverts commit 380fa26.
Before, rustdoc was missing `-C passes=list` and the "Available options" header. Making these match allows testing that they match exactly.
This make rustdoc resilient to changes in the debugging options while still testing that it matches rustc.
…e `static.files` folder
Replace rustdoc-ui/{c,z}-help tests with a stable run-make test
This make rustdoc resilient to changes in the debugging options while still testing that it matches rustc.
Fixesrust-lang#109391.…on-code, r=davidtwco fix: ensure bad `#[test]` invocs retain correct AST Fixesrust-lang#109816 Ensures that a `StmtKind::Item` doesn't get converted into a plain `Item` (causing the ICE from the linked issue) Also unifies the error path a bit.
sync::mpsc: synchronize receiver disconnect with initialization Receiver disconnection relies on the incorrect assumption that `head.index != tail.index` implies that the channel is initialized (i.e `head.block` and `tail.block` point to allocated blocks). However, it can happen that `head.index != tail.index` and `head.block == null` at the same time which leads to a segfault when a channel is dropped in that state. This can happen because initialization is performed in two steps. First, the tail block is allocated and the `tail.block` is set. If that is successful `head.block` is set to the same pointer. Importantly, initialization is skipped if `tail.block` is not null. Therefore we can have the following situation: 1. Thread A starts to send the first value of the channel, observes that `tail.block` is null and begins initialization. It sets `tail.block` to point to a newly allocated block and then gets preempted. `head.block` is still null at this point. 2. Thread B starts to send the second value of the channel, observes that `tail.block` *is not* null and proceeds with writing its value in the allocated tail block and sets `tail.index` to 1. 3. Thread B drops the receiver of the channel which observes that `head.index != tail.index` (0 and 1 respectively), therefore there must be messages to drop. It starts traversing the linked list from `head.block` which is still a null pointer, leading to a segfault. This PR fixes this problem by waiting for initialization to complete when `head.index != tail.index` and the `head.block` is still null. A similar check exists in `start_recv` for similar reasons. Fixesrust-lang#110001
…ws, r=lcnr Report overflows gracefully with new solver avoid reporting overflows as ambiguity errors, so that the error message is clearer. r? ```@lcnr```
Fix x check --stage 1 when download-ci-llvm=false Bootstrap tries to avoid building LLVM unless it needs to; in particular we only build it for `x build`, not `x check`. Unfortunately, the check forgot about existence of stages - it would break if you used `x check --stage 1`: ``` = note: /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lPolly: No such file or directory /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lPollyISL: No such file or directory ``` Fix it to work for stage 1. I recommend reading this commit-by-commit; the first one makes a bunch of whitespace changes but otherwise doesn't change the logic.
…trochenkov Do not use ImplDerivedObligationCause for inherent impl method error reporting We were constructing a `TraitRef` out of impl substs, for an *inherent* impl that has no corresponding trait. Instead of doing that, let's construct a meaningful obligation cause code, and instead adjust the error reporting machinery to handle that correctly. Fixesrust-lang#110131 cc rust-lang#106702, which introduced this regression
…avidtwco Revert "Don't recover lifetimes/labels containing emojis as character literals" Reverts PR rust-lang#108031 per rust-lang#109754 (comment) Fixes (doesnt close until beta backported) rust-lang#109746 This reverts commit e3f9db5. This reverts commit 98b82ae. This reverts commit 380fa26.
…otriddle Fix `--extend-css` option Fixesrust-lang#110002. The file was generated in the wrong folder so I moved it into `static.files` as it made more sense to have there instead of changing the path in the templates. I also added a GUI test to ensure that this option won't break unexpectedly again.
matthiaskrgr
commented
Apr 12, 2023
MemberAuthor
@bors r+ rollup=never p=8 |
bors
commented
Apr 12, 2023
Collaborator
bors
commented
Apr 12, 2023
Collaborator
bors
commented
Apr 13, 2023
Collaborator
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
rust-timer
commented
Apr 13, 2023
Collaborator
📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR: previous master: 4087deaccd In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: |
This was referenced Apr 13, 2023
rust-timer
commented
Apr 13, 2023
Collaborator
Finished benchmarking commit (9693b17): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Max RSS (memory usage)ResultsThis is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
CyclesResultsThis is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
|
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
9 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:
#[test]invocs retain correct AST #110035 (fix: ensure bad#[test]invocs retain correct AST)--extend-cssoption #110235 (Fix--extend-cssoption)Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup