Skip to content

Simplify lookup of DepKind names in duplicate dep node check #151402

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
Merged
rust-bors merged 3 commits into from
Jan 21, 2026
Merged

Simplify lookup of DepKind names in duplicate dep node check #151402

rust-bors merged 3 commits into from
Jan 21, 2026

Conversation

@Zalathar
Copy link
Member

@Zalathar Zalathar commented Jan 20, 2026

This PR simplifies parts of the query system, by removing the make_dep_kind_name_array! macro, and removing much of the associated plumbing added by 68fd771.

Instead, we now create a DEP_KIND_NAMES constant in define_dep_nodes!, and look up names in that instead.

@rustbot rustbot added A-query-system Area: The rustc query system (https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/query.html) 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 Jan 20, 2026
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 20, 2026

r? @petrochenkov

rustbot has assigned @petrochenkov.
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

@Zalathar
Copy link
Member Author

Zalathar commented Jan 20, 2026

Back in #115920 I see some mention of allowing other crates to define dep kinds, but I can’t find any indication of why that’s desirable, or whether anything ever came of it.

@Kobzol
Copy link
Member

Kobzol commented Jan 20, 2026

@bors try @rust-timer queue

Just to be sure :)

When working on derive proc-macro caching recently, I was quite confused by the depkind names are generated. Any simplifications are welcome 😁

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
rust-bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 20, 2026
@bors
Auto merge of #151402 - Zalathar:dep-kind-name, r=<try>
7945977 
Simplify lookup of `DepKind` names in duplicate dep node check
@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jan 20, 2026
@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Jan 20, 2026

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 7945977 (79459778fb94a22654c3b574dd5593e6e1a6c97e, parent: 79818181387879de7a521366d9bea23624728462)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

rust-timer commented Jan 20, 2026

Finished benchmarking commit (7945977): 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)		 0.4% [0.4%, 0.4%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -0.1% [-0.1%, -0.1%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.0%, secondary -5.6%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 2.6% [2.6%, 2.6%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -0.6% [-0.6%, -0.6%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -5.6% [-5.6%, -5.6%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.0% [-0.6%, 2.6%] 2

Cycles

Results (primary 2.5%, secondary 4.4%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 2.5% [2.5%, 2.5%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 4.4% [3.2%, 5.5%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.5% [2.5%, 2.5%] 1

Binary size

Results (primary -0.0%, 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)		 -0.0% [-0.0%, -0.0%] 13
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -0.0% [-0.1%, -0.0%] 6
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.0% [-0.0%, -0.0%] 13

Bootstrap: 473.092s -> 475.338s (0.47%)
Artifact size: 383.30 MiB -> 383.26 MiB (-0.01%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jan 20, 2026
petrochenkov
petrochenkov reviewed Jan 20, 2026
View reviewed changes
@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

petrochenkov commented Jan 20, 2026

r=me after removing the Clone impl if possible.
@bors rollup=maybe
@rustbot author

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jan 20, 2026
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 21, 2026

This PR was rebased onto a different main 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.

@Zalathar
Copy link
Member Author

Zalathar commented Jan 21, 2026

Removed the unnecessary #[derive(Clone)] by giving DepGraph<D> a clone impl that doesn't naively require D: Clone.

@bors r=petrochenkov

@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Jan 21, 2026

📌 Commit 395ca3b has been approved by petrochenkov

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@rust-bors rust-bors bot 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 Jan 21, 2026
@jhpratt jhpratt mentioned this pull request Jan 21, 2026
Merged
rust-bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 21, 2026
@bors
Auto merge of #151443 - jhpratt:rollup-wfHDCMS, r=jhpratt
838db25 
Rollup of 4 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - #148637 (Replace `#[rustc_do_not_implement_via_object]` with `#[rustc_dyn_incompatible_trait]`)
 - #149209 (Move LTO to OngoingCodegen::join)
 - #151402 (Simplify lookup of `DepKind` names in duplicate dep node check)
 - #151437 (Roll bootstrap reviewers for `src/tools/build-manifest`)

r? @ghost
@rust-bors rust-bors bot merged commit 9805475 into rust-lang:main Jan 21, 2026
11 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.95.0 milestone Jan 21, 2026
rust-timer added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 21, 2026
@rust-timer
Unrolled build for #151402
7b448f2 
Rollup merge of #151402 - dep-kind-name, r=petrochenkov

Simplify lookup of `DepKind` names in duplicate dep node check

This PR simplifies parts of the query system, by removing the `make_dep_kind_name_array!` macro, and removing much of the associated plumbing added by 68fd771.

Instead, we now create a `DEP_KIND_NAMES` constant in `define_dep_nodes!`, and look up names in that instead.
@Zalathar Zalathar deleted the dep-kind-name branch January 21, 2026 13:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@petrochenkov petrochenkov petrochenkov left review comments

Assignees

@petrochenkov petrochenkov

Labels

A-query-system Area: The rustc query system (https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/query.html) 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

Milestone

1.95.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@Zalathar @rustbot @Kobzol @rust-timer @petrochenkov