Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rollup of 5 pull requests #134687

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
Dec 23, 2024
Merged

Rollup of 5 pull requests #134687

merged 15 commits into from
Dec 23, 2024

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

jieyouxu and others added 15 commits December 20, 2024 02:32
- Fixed test name, it should've been `rustc_bootstrap.rs`, oops.
- Slightly reworded test comment to make it more clear.
- removes unused variables
- fixes a few typos
Use `#[derive(Default)]` instead of manual `impl` when possible

While working on rust-lang#134175 I noticed a few manual `Default` `impl`s that could be `derive`d instead. These likely predate the existence of the `#[default]` attribute for `enum`s.
Add tests for coverage attribute on trait functions

This adds tests for the coverage attribute on trait functions. cc rust-lang#84605 (comment)
… r=Kobzol

opt-dist: propagate channel info to bootstrap

Fixes rust-lang#133503.

Previously, `tests/ui/bootstrap/rustc_bootstap.rs` [sic] failed during [beta bump](rust-lang#133447 (comment)) in opt-dist tests. This is because:

- `opt-dist` tried to run `./x test` against beta-channel dist `rustc` through `bootstrap`.
- The dist build produced during the beta bump produces a `rustc` which correctly thinks that it is a beta compiler based on `src/ci/channel` info.
- `opt-dist` tries to run `./x test` on the beta `rustc` from the dist build, but without specifying channel through a synthetic `config.toml`, so `bootstrap` tells `compiletest` that we're on the `nightly` channel (by default).
- Now there's a channel mismatch: `compiletest` believes the `rustc` under test is a *nightly* rustc, but the `rustc` under test actually considers itself a *beta* rustc. This means that `//@ only-nightly` will be satisfied yet the test will fail as the *beta* rustc is not a *nightly* rustc.

This PR:

- Fixes the test failure during beta bump (i.e. rust-lang#133503) by having `opt-dist` faithfully report the channel of the dist `rustc` being tested (i.e. "beta" in a beta bump PR). This will properly make the test be ignored during beta bump as the `rustc` under test is not a *nightly* rustc.
- Fixes the test name `rustc_bootstap.rs` -> `rustc_bootstrap.rs`. No more stapping.
- Slightly adjusts the doc comment in the test to make it more clear.

I ran a try-job against the beta branch (explicitly running the opt-dist tests by modifying the job definition) with these changes in rust-lang#134131, and it appears that the try-job was [successful](rust-lang#134131 (comment)). The two commits in this PR are cherry-picked from rust-lang#134131, with the test commit slightly modified (to also adjust the test comments).

r? `@Kobzol` (or compiler or bootstrap or infra I guess?)
Document the `--dev` flag for `src/ci/docker/run.sh`

This flag is very helpful for debugging CI issues locally, but it's not documented anywhere and I wasn't aware of it until `@jieyouxu` pointed it out. Add a note to the CI Docker readme to make this more discoverable
Clean up a few rmake tests

Now I'm aware it's a bit late to start participating in the Advent of Tests, but here are a few cleanups in the rmake tests to put under the 🎄 anyways. A handful of unused imports, some warnings, and a couple typos.

r? `@jieyouxu` 🎅
@rustbot rustbot added A-run-make Area: port run-make Makefiles to rmake.rs A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Dec 23, 2024
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 23, 2024

📌 Commit a16fc10 has been approved by matthiaskrgr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Dec 23, 2024
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 23, 2024
…iaskrgr

Rollup of 5 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#134363 (Use `#[derive(Default)]` instead of manual `impl` when possible)
 - rust-lang#134517 (Add tests for coverage attribute on trait functions)
 - rust-lang#134528 (opt-dist: propagate channel info to bootstrap)
 - rust-lang#134669 (Document the `--dev` flag for `src/ci/docker/run.sh`)
 - rust-lang#134680 (Clean up a few rmake tests  )

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 23, 2024

⌛ Testing commit a16fc10 with merge 54b4d06...

@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

The job x86_64-msvc-ext1 failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
fatal: unable to access '/~https://github.com/XAMPPRocky/tokei/': Failed to connect to github.com port 443 after 21136 ms: Could not connect to server
thread 'main' panicked at src\tools\cargotest\main.rs:147:13:
assertion failed: status.success()
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace
Command has failed. Rerun with -v to see more details.
  local time: Mon, Dec 23, 2024  4:37:57 PM
  network time: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 16:37:58 GMT
##[error]Process completed with exit code 1.
Post job cleanup.

@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors retry

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 23, 2024

⌛ Testing commit a16fc10 with merge addbd00...

@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr added the A-spurious Area: Spurious failures in builds (spuriously == for no apparent reason) label Dec 23, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 23, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing addbd00 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Dec 23, 2024
@bors bors merged commit addbd00 into rust-lang:master Dec 23, 2024
7 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.85.0 milestone Dec 23, 2024
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Message Perf Build Sha
#134363 Use #[derive(Default)] instead of manual impl when poss… 9dcbc2462397345c3525db0539c8f1b766a07828 (link)
#134517 Add tests for coverage attribute on trait functions 8341221bfbd4337fb2cafda593ceb4fc4b0db9f8 (link)
#134528 opt-dist: propagate channel info to bootstrap 381d37c37c66263832a91d2cad8664239c34efb4 (link)
#134669 Document the --dev flag for src/ci/docker/run.sh 66173b949985d7a351d08e38254b9688c3f3f60d (link)
#134680 Clean up a few rmake tests a1bf4b46e13fb93daa25f084705f3884747e571f (link)

previous master: 904d8f6b39

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (addbd00): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.2% [-0.4%, -0.2%] 3
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 0.6%)

This 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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
0.6% [0.6%, 0.6%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.6% [0.6%, 0.6%] 1

Cycles

Results (primary -4.6%)

This 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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-4.6% [-7.2%, -1.6%] 8
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -4.6% [-7.2%, -1.6%] 8

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 763.12s -> 764.878s (0.23%)
Artifact size: 330.55 MiB -> 330.56 MiB (0.00%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-run-make Area: port run-make Makefiles to rmake.rs A-spurious Area: Spurious failures in builds (spuriously == for no apparent reason) A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

10 participants