Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Rollup of 7 pull requests - #92065
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This reverts commit 3281022.
See rust-lang#91867 for more information.
platforms, not just Apple ones.
To avoid breaking split DWARF, we need to ensure that each codegen unit has a
unique `DW_AT_name`. This is because there's a remote chance that different
codegen units for the same module will have entirely identical DWARF entries
for the purpose of the DWO ID, which would violate Appendix F ("Split Dwarf
Object Files") of the DWARF 5 specification. LLVM uses the algorithm specified
in section 7.32 "Type Signature Computation" to compute the DWO ID, which does
not include any fields that would distinguish compilation units. So we must
embed the codegen unit name into the `DW_AT_name`.
Closesrust-lang#88521.This ensures that the output does not depend on environment variables set in the shell.
Apply path remapping to DW_AT_GNU_dwo_name when producing split DWARF `--remap-path-prefix` doesn't apply to paths to `.o` (in case of packed) or `.dwo` (in case of unpacked) files in `DW_AT_GNU_dwo_name`. GCC also has this bug https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91888
…om_rustc_metadata, r=nagisa Remove `in_band_lifetimes` from `rustc_metadata` Another for rust-lang#91867
…_llvm, r=davidtwco Remove `in_band_lifetimes` from `rustc_codegen_llvm` See rust-lang#91867 for more information. This one took a while. This crate has dozens of functions not associated with any type, and most of them were using in-band lifetimes for `'ll` and `'tcx`.
…davidtwco
rustc_codegen_llvm: Give each codegen unit a unique DWARF name on all platforms, not just Apple ones.
To avoid breaking split DWARF, we need to ensure that each codegen unit has a
unique `DW_AT_name`. This is because there's a remote chance that different
codegen units for the same module will have entirely identical DWARF entries
for the purpose of the DWO ID, which would violate Appendix F ("Split Dwarf
Object Files") of the DWARF 5 specification. LLVM uses the algorithm specified
in section 7.32 "Type Signature Computation" to compute the DWO ID, which does
not include any fields that would distinguish compilation units. So we must
embed the codegen unit name into the `DW_AT_name`.
Closesrust-lang#88521.Use a const ParamEnv when in default_method_body_is_const r? `@oli-obk` This PR fixes the param_env function to return `constness: Const` correctly for trait methods marked with `#[default_method_body_is_const]`. The snippet below is erroneously accepted by the compiler and has been fixed by this change. ([Playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=12dc6681b2eeee5f604203d96259eeb4)) ```rust #![feature(const_fn_trait_bound)] #![feature(const_trait_impl)] trait Tr {} impl Tr for () {} const fn foo<T>() where T: ~const Tr {} pub trait Foo { #[default_method_body_is_const] fn foo() { foo::<()>(); } } ```
…, r=Mark-Simulacrum Set `RUST_BACKTRACE=0` when running location-detail tests This ensures that the output does not depend on environment variables set in the shell.
Add a space and 2 grave accents I only noticed this because I have this implementation copy pasted in some places in my code and I really can't wait for this to be stabilized...
matthiaskrgr
commented
Dec 18, 2021
MemberAuthor
@bors r+ rollup=never p=7 |
bors
commented
Dec 18, 2021
Collaborator
📌 Commit 1ac1f24 has been approved by |
bors
commented
Dec 18, 2021
Collaborator
⌛ Testing commit 1ac1f24 with merge 17c357c7c3dc3a2e7659644eccb725c2d79430e7... |
rust-log-analyzer
commented
Dec 18, 2021
Collaborator
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
bors
commented
Dec 18, 2021
Collaborator
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
matthiaskrgr
commented
Dec 18, 2021
MemberAuthor
bors
commented
Dec 18, 2021
Collaborator
bors
commented
Dec 18, 2021
Collaborator
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
bors
commented
Dec 18, 2021
Collaborator
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
This was referenced Dec 18, 2021
Merged
rust-timer
commented
Dec 19, 2021
Collaborator
Finished benchmarking commit (91a0600): comparison url. Summary: This benchmark run did not return any relevant changes. If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. @rustbot label: -perf-regression |
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
11 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:
in_band_lifetimesfromrustc_metadata#91926 (Removein_band_lifetimesfromrustc_metadata)in_band_lifetimesfromrustc_codegen_llvm#91931 (Removein_band_lifetimesfromrustc_codegen_llvm)RUST_BACKTRACE=0when running location-detail tests #92047 (SetRUST_BACKTRACE=0when running location-detail tests)Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup