Rollup of 8 pull requests#158027
Closed
JonathanBrouwer wants to merge 16 commits into
Closed
Conversation
LLVM 23 recently changed SimplifyCFG to avoid integer lookup tables, and that perturbed these two tests in ways that look harmless to me.
When a `for` loop is missing its `in`, the parser suggested inserting one based only on the token after the pattern. A malformed binding such as `for i i in 0..10` was therefore "corrected" to `for i in i in 0..10`, which does not parse. Only suggest inserting `in` when the loop header does not already contain one before the body.
When passing multiple `-Zsanitizer` flags to the compiler (e.g., `-Zsanitizer=address -Zsanitizer=shadow-call-stack`), the options parser was overwriting the previous values in `target_modifiers` instead of accumulating them. This resulted in only the last sanitizer being recorded in the crate metadata's target modifiers, even though the frontend correctly enabled all of them. The only way to provide multiple sanitizers was to combine them into a comma-separated list passed to a single `-Zsanitizer=` flag, but this does not fit well into the GN build system where different targets may pass different combinations of sanitizer flags. Consequently, this caused spurious "incompatible target modifiers" ABI mismatch errors when linking against dependencies compiled with accumulated flags (e.g., `-Zsanitizer=address,shadow-call-stack`). Fix this by entry-modifying the `target_modifiers` map to accumulate the sanitizers as a comma-separated list when the option is `sanitizer`. Also add a codegen test verifying that both CFI and SafeStack attributes/metadata are present when enabled together via multiple flags. Test: ./x.py test tests/codegen-llvm/sanitizer/multiple-sanitizers.rs
… r=petrochenkov Accumulate multiple -Zsanitizer target modifiers When passing multiple `-Zsanitizer` flags to the compiler (e.g., `-Zsanitizer=address -Zsanitizer=shadow-call-stack`), the options parser was overwriting the previous values in `target_modifiers` instead of accumulating them. This resulted in only the last sanitizer being recorded in the crate metadata's target modifiers, even though the frontend correctly enabled all of them. The only way to provide multiple sanitizers is to combine them into a comma-separated list passed to a single `-Zsanitizer=` flag, but this doesn't fit very well into the GN build system where different targets may pass different combinations of sanitizer flags. Consequently, this caused spurious "incompatible target modifiers" ABI mismatch errors when linking against dependencies compiled with accumulated flags. Fix this by entry-modifying the `target_modifiers` map to accumulate the sanitizers as a comma-separated list when the option is `sanitizer`.
…mfix, r=joboet Stabilize `strip_circumfix` Tracking issue: rust-lang#147946
…i865 Query the trait solver in slow path for `missing_debug_implementations` Fixes rust-lang#157757 Fixes rust-lang#157758
tests: adapt two tests for LLVM 23 changes LLVM 23 recently changed SimplifyCFG to avoid integer lookup tables, and that perturbed these two tests in ways that look harmless to me.
…estion-103561, r=folkertdev Don't suggest adding `in` to a `for` loop that already has one Closes rust-lang#103561. When a `for` loop is missing its `in`, the parser suggested inserting one based only on the token following the pattern. For a malformed binding such as `for i i in 0..10` it therefore suggested `for i in i in 0..10`, which is itself invalid. The suggestion is now only emitted when the loop header does not already contain an `in` before the body. The `for x EXPR` / `for x of EXPR` / `for x = EXPR` suggestions are unchanged.
…ble-shim, r=folkertdev Preserve track_caller for by-value dyn vtable shims Fixes rust-lang#157964
…, r=petrochenkov delegation: add simple test for incremental compilation Progress on incremental lowering (rust-lang#142830) fixed rust-lang#155729 by removing delayed lowering at all. Fixes rust-lang#155729. Part of rust-lang#118212. r? @petrochenkov
…ate, r=mejrs Move `UnusedDuplicate` diag struct to `rustc_attr_parsing` This was moved there in rust-lang#154432, I am not entirely sure why there? This was probably an oversight, at least I missed this during review cc @GuillaumeGomez r? @mejrs
rustbot
added
A-attributes
Contributor
Author
Contributor
rust-bors
Bot
added
S-waiting-on-bors
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
rust-bors Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 17, 2026
Rollup of 8 pull requests try-job: dist-various-1 try-job: test-various try-job: x86_64-gnu-aux try-job: x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-3 try-job: x86_64-msvc-1 try-job: aarch64-apple try-job: x86_64-mingw-1 try-job: i686-msvc-2
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
rust-bors Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 17, 2026
…uwer Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #157788 (Accumulate multiple -Zsanitizer target modifiers) - #158012 (Stabilize `strip_circumfix`) - #157810 (Query the trait solver in slow path for `missing_debug_implementations`) - #157829 (tests: adapt two tests for LLVM 23 changes) - #157917 (Don't suggest adding `in` to a `for` loop that already has one) - #157967 (Preserve track_caller for by-value dyn vtable shims) - #158019 (delegation: add simple test for incremental compilation) - #158023 (Move `UnusedDuplicate` diag struct to `rustc_attr_parsing`)
Contributor
Collaborator
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
rust-bors
Bot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Contributor
|
💔 Test for a41e1f6 failed: CI. Failed job:
|
Member
|
@bors retry |
rust-bors
Bot
added
S-waiting-on-bors
rust-bors
Bot
added
S-waiting-on-author
Contributor
|
This pull request was unapproved due to being closed. |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
11 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:
strip_circumfix#158012 (Stabilizestrip_circumfix)missing_debug_implementations#157810 (Query the trait solver in slow path formissing_debug_implementations)into aforloop that already has one #157917 (Don't suggest addinginto aforloop that already has one)UnusedDuplicatediag struct torustc_attr_parsing#158023 (MoveUnusedDuplicatediag struct torustc_attr_parsing)r? @ghost
Create a similar rollup