Skip to content

Conversation

@tamird
Copy link
Contributor

@tamird tamird commented Oct 13, 2025

Improve type safety by using an enum rather than strings.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 13, 2025

These commits modify compiler targets.
(See the Target Tier Policy.)

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_attr_parsing

cc @jdonszelmann

Some changes occurred in cfg and check-cfg configuration

cc @Urgau

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_cranelift

cc @bjorn3

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_ssa

cc @WaffleLapkin

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc

cc @antoyo, @GuillaumeGomez

@rustbot rustbot added A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) A-LLVM Area: Code generation parts specific to LLVM. Both correctness bugs and optimization-related issues. O-apple Operating system: Apple (macOS, iOS, tvOS, visionOS, watchOS) 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. labels Oct 13, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 13, 2025

r? @nnethercote

rustbot has assigned @nnethercote.
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

@tamird tamird force-pushed the arch-enum branch 2 times, most recently from 289dc7b to 23b2e59 Compare October 13, 2025 20:42
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor

This seems like a good change, but I think it's large enough that it should have an MCP, meeting the criteria of "Significant internal refactorings/changes" -- it's a simple change, but one that touches a lot of files.

@tamird
Copy link
Contributor Author

tamird commented Oct 14, 2025

This seems like a good change, but I think it's large enough that it should have an MCP, meeting the criteria of "Significant internal refactorings/changes" -- it's a simple change, but one that touches a lot of files.

Done: rust-lang/compiler-team#926.

@Urgau
Copy link
Member

Urgau commented Oct 14, 2025

I'm curious if this has any performance impact, let's see.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 14, 2025
rustc_target: introduce Architecture
@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Oct 14, 2025
@rust-bors
Copy link

rust-bors bot commented Oct 14, 2025

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 3a048fa (3a048fab4921cf40ac8c01ca813c3fde6e3a2caa, parent: e100792918c8bd9e0cb830f96fc9b171e8892fa1)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (3a048fa): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.8% [0.8%, 0.8%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.2% [-0.2%, -0.2%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.1%, secondary 1.1%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
1.8% [1.0%, 3.6%] 7
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-2.1% [-2.7%, -1.6%] 2
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-1.3% [-1.4%, -1.3%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) -2.1% [-2.7%, -1.6%] 2

Cycles

Results (primary 2.1%, secondary 0.1%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.1% [2.1%, 2.1%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.6% [3.6%, 3.6%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-3.4% [-3.4%, -3.4%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.1% [2.1%, 2.1%] 1

Binary size

Results (secondary -0.0%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.0% [-0.0%, -0.0%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Bootstrap: 473.51s -> 474.979s (0.31%)
Artifact size: 388.11 MiB -> 388.13 MiB (0.01%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Oct 14, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Oct 15, 2025

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #147692) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@rustbot

This comment has been minimized.

@nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor

Looks like two things are needed:

  • Rename Architecture as Arch (there were 8 people agreeing with this suggestion in the Zulip thread, judging by the emoji responses)
  • Add the Unknown variant.

@rustbot author

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Oct 24, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Nov 5, 2025

This PR was rebased onto a different master commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

@nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor

Looks good! Thanks for you patience with this one. I think it's a good improvement.

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Nov 5, 2025

📌 Commit 26b0560 has been approved by nnethercote

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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Nov 5, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Nov 5, 2025

⌛ Testing commit 26b0560 with merge c0ff72f...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Nov 5, 2025

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: nnethercote
Pushing c0ff72f to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Nov 5, 2025
@bors bors merged commit c0ff72f into rust-lang:master Nov 5, 2025
12 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.93.0 milestone Nov 5, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Nov 5, 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 6e41e61 (parent) -> c0ff72f (this PR)

Test differences

Show 4 test diffs

Stage 0

  • tests::custom_arch_propagates_from_json: [missing] -> pass (J1)

Stage 1

  • tests::custom_arch_propagates_from_json: [missing] -> pass (J0)

Additionally, 2 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Job group index

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard c0ff72ffc4e88a2bbb69add95a4946d213996895 --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. pr-check-1: 1588.1s -> 1964.4s (+23.7%)
  2. i686-gnu-1: 7223.9s -> 8442.1s (+16.9%)
  3. aarch64-gnu-llvm-20-2: 2211.7s -> 2551.1s (+15.3%)
  4. x86_64-gnu-llvm-20: 2485.2s -> 2792.9s (+12.4%)
  5. dist-aarch64-apple: 6938.1s -> 6090.1s (-12.2%)
  6. x86_64-gnu-gcc: 3256.4s -> 3622.2s (+11.2%)
  7. i686-gnu-2: 5596.1s -> 6196.2s (+10.7%)
  8. x86_64-gnu-llvm-20-2: 5352.8s -> 5916.4s (+10.5%)
  9. x86_64-gnu-tools: 3328.3s -> 3667.2s (+10.2%)
  10. dist-powerpc-linux: 4739.4s -> 5187.4s (+9.5%)
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 (c0ff72f): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.1% [0.1%, 0.1%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.1% [-0.1%, -0.0%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.0%, secondary -1.6%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.8% [2.8%, 2.8%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.0% [0.8%, 6.1%] 6
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.9% [-0.9%, -0.9%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-3.9% [-5.6%, -1.8%] 12
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.0% [-0.9%, 2.8%] 2

Cycles

Results (primary -3.8%, secondary -0.9%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.4% [1.6%, 5.1%] 6
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-3.8% [-3.8%, -3.8%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-5.2% [-9.1%, -1.5%] 6
All ❌✅ (primary) -3.8% [-3.8%, -3.8%] 1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 475.404s -> 474.063s (-0.28%)
Artifact size: 390.71 MiB -> 390.97 MiB (0.06%)

@tamird tamird deleted the arch-enum branch November 5, 2025 15:02
tautschnig added a commit to tautschnig/kani that referenced this pull request Nov 6, 2025
Relevant upstream PR:
- rust-lang/rust#147645 (rustc_target: introduce Arch)

Resolves: model-checking#4450
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit to model-checking/kani that referenced this pull request Nov 6, 2025
Relevant upstream PR:
- rust-lang/rust#147645 (rustc_target: introduce
Arch)

Resolves: #4450

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made
under the terms of the Apache 2.0 and MIT licenses.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) A-LLVM Area: Code generation parts specific to LLVM. Both correctness bugs and optimization-related issues. merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. O-apple Operating system: Apple (macOS, iOS, tvOS, visionOS, watchOS) 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.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants