Rollup of 14 pull requests #148202
Merged
Rollup of 14 pull requests #148202
+1,368
−201
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
One can use unstable features on stable too, like via an env var
This updates the rust-version file to 4068baf.
Pull recent changes from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust via Josh. Upstream ref: 4068baf Filtered ref: da574cbe2d3bcda451b7508b65e82de837b9c92d Upstream diff: rust-lang/rust@4fa824b...4068baf This merge was created using https://github.com/rust-lang/josh-sync.
Rustc pull update
the previous command already builds using in-tree std
I had a test I was confused by; the root issue is that `error-pattern` runs before normalization, even though `//~ ERROR` runs after normalization. This logging caught the issue immediately.
Add the gpu version of the kernel which was missing in the docs
To avoid linker errors like
relocation truncated to fit: R_AARCH64_ADR_PREL_PG_HI21 against `.data.rel.ro..L.hwasan'
we need to have `-C target-feature=+tagged-globals`, which is documented here:
https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/unstable-book/compiler-flags/sanitizer.html#hwaddresssanitizer
I accidentally commited some things with my name/email swapped ^^'
The LoongArch C/C++ cross toolchain defaults to the `normal` code model, which can cause relocation overflows when linking LLVM after upgrading to verion 22. This change uses the `medium`code model for `loongarch64-linux-gnu` and `loongarch64-linux-musl` builds to avoid these linking errors.
This updates the rust-version file to b1b464d.
Pull recent changes from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust via Josh. Upstream ref: b1b464d Filtered ref: f94cd4e7de0695f11c7f0bf0d33bb39ce736c581 Upstream diff: rust-lang/rust@4068baf...b1b464d This merge was created using https://github.com/rust-lang/josh-sync.
remove untrue/contentious statement
Rustc pull update
- Fix 'the the' → 'the' in rustc_const_eval - Fix 'wether' → 'whether' in compiletest - Fix 'is is' → 'is' in rustc_ast_pretty (2 instances) Signed-off-by: Osama Abdelkader <osama.abdelkader@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Kevin Reid <kpreid@switchb.org>
rustbot
added
A-rustdoc-search
|
Rollup of everything. Some of these PRs have not had a fair chance to run in CI. @bors r+ rollup=never p=6 |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
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 df984ed (parent) -> c9537a9 (this PR) Test differencesShow 312 test diffsStage 1
Stage 2
Additionally, 252 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy. Job group index
Test dashboardRun cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
test-dashboard c9537a94a6300a8292804829801f7724fb8a33f6 --output-dir test-dashboardAnd then open Job duration changes
How to interpret the job duration changes?Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance |
|
📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:
previous master: df984edf44 In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (c9537a9): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read the text belowOur benchmarks found a performance regression caused by this PR. Next Steps:
@rustbot label: +perf-regression Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary 0.3%, secondary 0.6%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesResults (primary 2.5%, secondary 2.9%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 474.956s -> 474.143s (-0.17%) |
This was referenced Oct 28, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
22 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.
Successful merges:
coveragescope for controlling paths in code coverage #148139 (Addcoveragescope for controlling paths in code coverage)Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup