track cycle participants per root #125308
Merged
Conversation
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
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
Some changes occurred to the core trait solver cc @rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor |
rust-cloud-vms
bot
force-pushed
the
search-graph-5
branch
from
1114458 to
6206dce
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #125324) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
compiler-errors
approved these changes
May 20, 2024
|
r=me after rebase |
rust-cloud-vms
bot
force-pushed
the
search-graph-5
branch
from
479707b to
f99c9ff
Compare
|
@bors r+ rollup |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
@bors r=compiler-errors |
|
💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.
|
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 21, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#124050 (Remove libc from MSVC targets) - rust-lang#124283 (Note for E0599 if shadowed bindings has the method.) - rust-lang#125123 (Fix `read_exact` and `read_buf_exact` for `&[u8]` and `io:Cursor`) - rust-lang#125158 (hir pretty: fix block indent) - rust-lang#125308 (track cycle participants per root) - rust-lang#125332 (Update books) - rust-lang#125333 (switch to the default implementation of `write_vectored`) - rust-lang#125346 (Remove some `Path::to_str` from `rustc_codegen_llvm`) Failed merges: - rust-lang#125310 (Move ~100 tests from tests/ui to subdirs) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
lcnr
added
T-types
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 21, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#125308 - lcnr:search-graph-5, r=compiler-errors track cycle participants per root The search graph may have multiple roots, e.g. in ``` A :- B B :- A, C C :- D D :- C ``` we first encounter the `A -> B -> A` cycle which causes `A` to be a root. We then later encounter the `C -> D -> C` cycle as a nested goal of `B`. This cycle is completely separate and `C` will get moved to the global cache. This previously caused us to use `[B, D]` as the `cycle_participants` for `C` and `[]` for `A`. split off from rust-lang#125167 as I would like to merge this change separately and will rebase that PR on top of this one. There is no test for this issue and I don't quite know how to write one. It is probably worth it to generalize the search graph to enable us to write unit tests for it. r? `@compiler-errors`
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 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.
The search graph may have multiple roots, e.g. in
we first encounter the
A -> B -> Acycle which causesAto be a root. We then later encounter theC -> D -> Ccycle as a nested goal ofB. This cycle is completely separate andCwill get moved to the global cache. This previously caused us to use[B, D]as thecycle_participantsforCand[]forA.split off from #125167 as I would like to merge this change separately and will rebase that PR on top of this one. There is no test for this issue and I don't quite know how to write one. It is probably worth it to generalize the search graph to enable us to write unit tests for it.
r? @compiler-errors