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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Bump to 1.78 bootstrap compiler #122754

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Mar 20, 2024
Merged

Bump to 1.78 bootstrap compiler #122754

merged 5 commits into from
Mar 20, 2024

Conversation

Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Mar 19, 2024

r? @albertlarsan68

rustbot has assigned @albertlarsan68.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added 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-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) 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-release Relevant to the release subteam, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Mar 19, 2024
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Mar 19, 2024

Some changes occurred to the platform-builtins intrinsics. Make sure the
LLVM backend as well as portable-simd gets adapted for the changes.

cc @antoyo, @GuillaumeGomez, @bjorn3, @calebzulawski, @programmerjake

Some changes occurred in src/tools/rustfmt

cc @rust-lang/rustfmt

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

Some changes occurred in src/tools/compiletest

cc @jieyouxu

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum mentioned this pull request Mar 20, 2024
Closed
@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member Author

Filed #122758 and pushed what seems to be a workaround for that bug, we'll see if CI agrees.

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rustbot rustbot added the A-rustdoc-json Area: Rustdoc JSON backend label Mar 20, 2024
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member Author

Alright, looks like CI is happy, so this is probably ready for review.

@albertlarsan68
Copy link
Member

Am I supposed to review, or is it waiting on someone else?

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member Author

Sure, if you want to. This PR (well, this kind of PR every cycle) usually touches things all over the place but is pretty mechanical, so anyone can review it from my perspective.

@albertlarsan68
Copy link
Member

albertlarsan68 commented Mar 20, 2024 •
edited
Loading

A bunch of "on bootstrap bump, remove unsafe block" comments have been missed, it seem.

@Mark-Simulacrum
step cfgs
02f1930
@Mark-Simulacrum
Workaround for rustdoc bug in new beta
283db5a 
Filed rust-lang#122758 to track a proper fix, but this seems to solve the
problem in the meantime and is probably OK in terms of impact on
(internal) doc quality.
@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member Author

Fixed. Those really should have some mention of cfg(bootstrap) so that they're mechanically findable :/

@albertlarsan68
Copy link
Member

They have, and the bootstrap cfg has been correctly changed

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member Author

Well, we can perform simple cfg replacement without actually looking at the code. Ideally all other changes happen either automatically because of that (e.g., delete the function/block if it is cfg'd away). In this case it requires a human to look at it.

Personally I'd be in favor of not treating non-automatable and non-CI blocking bootstrap related things as not blocking - it's generally true that there's cleanup possible as you move to newer versions but it's not reasonable I think to push that all into a single PR.

@albertlarsan68
Copy link
Member

Sorry, first time reviewing bump PR!

@bors r+ rollup=never
I guess?

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 20, 2024

📌 Commit 9a22a0f has been approved by albertlarsan68

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 Mar 20, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 20, 2024

⌛ Testing commit 9a22a0f with merge a128516...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 20, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: albertlarsan68
Pushing a128516 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Mar 20, 2024
@bors bors merged commit a128516 into rust-lang:master Mar 20, 2024
12 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.79.0 milestone Mar 20, 2024
This was referenced Mar 20, 2024
Merged
Draft
Merged
Merged
Closed
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (a128516): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -3.7% [-3.7%, -3.7%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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)		 4.7% [4.7%, 4.7%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -5.3% [-5.3%, -5.3%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

Results

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)		 1.1% [1.1%, 1.1%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.1% [1.1%, 1.1%] 1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 668.111s -> 669.372s (0.19%)
Artifact size: 312.74 MiB -> 312.78 MiB (0.01%)

@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum deleted the bootstrap-bump branch March 21, 2024 11:26
@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan mentioned this pull request Mar 22, 2024
Closed
@onur-ozkan
Copy link
Member

Did we somehow miss something in this bump? Currently stage0 rustc is broken (see #122913) due to not being able to find the LLVM dylib.

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member Author

My guess is that is a pre-existing bug that would be exposed by any bump, not something missed in this particular case.

@Noratrieb
Copy link
Member

Yeah, this now ships the new libLLVM with the linker script. Something probably forgot to copy the stuff.

@zachs18 zachs18 mentioned this pull request May 3, 2024
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@albertlarsan68 albertlarsan68

Labels
A-rustdoc-json Area: Rustdoc JSON backend A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) 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-release Relevant to the release subteam, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
1.79.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
8 participants
@Mark-Simulacrum @rustbot @rust-log-analyzer @albertlarsan68 @bors @rust-timer @onur-ozkan @Noratrieb