Skip to content

Rollup of 4 pull requests #140735

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

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
May 7, 2025
Merged

Conversation

GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

xizheyin and others added 8 commits April 8, 2025 15:11
The documentation is talking about other way using only raw pointers, but the example was use `std::slice::from_raw_parts_mut` which also create a reference. `std::ptr::slice_from_raw_parts_mut` should be used instead, and it also highlights the benefit of raw pointer manipulation compared to dereference, as the function doesn't need to be unsafe anymore.

Moreover, [`unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/edition-guide/rust-2024/unsafe-op-in-unsafe-fn.html) warning has been enabled since Edition 2024, so I've updated the examples to use unsafe blocks.
Includes the following changes:

* Require `target_has_atomic = "ptr"` for runtime feature detection

[1]: rust-lang/compiler-builtins#909
Stabilize precise capture syntax in style guide

Closes rust-lang#138527

r? `@jieyouxu`
…ss35

Fix backtrace for cygwin

Closes rust-lang#140304

Depends on:
- [x] rust-lang/backtrace-rs#704

This PR could not be merged until the above PR is merged. I'll update the submodule then.

EDIT: submodule updated.
fix typo in autorefs lint doc example

The documentation is talking about other way using only raw pointers, but the example was use `std::slice::from_raw_parts_mut` which also create a reference. `std::ptr::slice_from_raw_parts_mut` should be used instead, and it also highlights the benefit of raw pointer manipulation compared to dereference, as the function doesn't need to be unsafe anymore.

Moreover, [`unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/edition-guide/rust-2024/unsafe-op-in-unsafe-fn.html) warning has been enabled since Edition 2024, so I've updated the examples to use unsafe blocks.
Update `compiler-builtins` to 0.1.158

Includes the following changes:

* Require `target_has_atomic = "ptr"` for runtime feature detection [1]

[1]: rust-lang/compiler-builtins#909
@rustbot rustbot added 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-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-style Relevant to the style team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels May 7, 2025
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ p=4 rollup=never

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 7, 2025

📌 Commit aca12a8 has been approved by GuillaumeGomez

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 May 7, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 7, 2025

⌛ Testing commit aca12a8 with merge db0e836...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 7, 2025

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: GuillaumeGomez
Pushing db0e836 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label May 7, 2025
@bors bors merged commit db0e836 into rust-lang:master May 7, 2025
7 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.88.0 milestone May 7, 2025
@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez deleted the rollup-dlhbxsg branch May 7, 2025 12:39
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Message Perf Build Sha
#139518 Stabilize precise capture syntax in style guide 7d18d73a1652a02a103e1df4b6c15d21e06fe149 (link)
#140398 Fix backtrace for cygwin 0780bfebd4b8fb126ad65ee72d98f9cf41a6c168 (link)
#140719 fix typo in autorefs lint doc example a97ac9108dc2b529f2771494d64bdcc0479934f0 (link)
#140724 Update compiler-builtins to 0.1.158 dd78c498dfe7dee32b4b302d3cddeb62f3c71d97 (link)

previous master: f76c7367c6

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

Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 7, 2025

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 f76c736 (parent) -> db0e836 (this PR)

Test differences

No test diffs found

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard db0e836148accac8a22532e3596ac612b63c2d8e --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

  1. dist-aarch64-apple: 5291.5s -> 7024.6s (32.8%)
  2. x86_64-apple-2: 6119.1s -> 4662.4s (-23.8%)
  3. x86_64-apple-1: 8814.1s -> 7364.3s (-16.4%)
  4. dist-arm-linux: 4551.5s -> 5257.9s (15.5%)
  5. dist-x86_64-apple: 8120.9s -> 9051.9s (11.5%)
  6. x86_64-gnu-distcheck: 4846.2s -> 4386.0s (-9.5%)
  7. x86_64-gnu: 6131.1s -> 6550.5s (6.8%)
  8. dist-i686-msvc: 6882.4s -> 7323.7s (6.4%)
  9. i686-msvc-2: 7603.5s -> 7194.4s (-5.4%)
  10. x86_64-gnu-aux: 6163.5s -> 5881.5s (-4.6%)
How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (db0e836): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

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

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 0.2%, secondary 3.1%)

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% [0.4%, 0.8%] 7
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.1% [1.1%, 5.0%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.8% [-1.5%, -0.5%] 3
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.2% [-1.5%, 0.8%] 10

Cycles

Results (primary 0.0%)

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)
0.5% [0.4%, 0.6%] 4
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.5% [-0.6%, -0.5%] 3
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.0% [-0.6%, 0.6%] 7

Binary size

Results (primary -0.3%, secondary -0.8%)

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)
-0.3% [-0.8%, -0.1%] 21
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.8% [-1.2%, -0.2%] 41
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.3% [-0.8%, -0.1%] 21

Bootstrap: 768.928s -> 768.419s (-0.07%)
Artifact size: 365.16 MiB -> 365.16 MiB (0.00%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
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-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-style Relevant to the style team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants