-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.9k
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.
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
Rollup of 5 pull requests #73081
Rollup of 5 pull requests #73081
Conversation
This reverts commit b998497.
This reverts commit a030c92.
This reverts commit 1a19c1d.
This reverts commit 54aa418.
…scope" This reverts commit 6119885.
We were computing a merge-base between the remote beta and master branches, but this was giving incorrect answers for the first beta if the remote hadn't been pushed yet. For instance, `1.45.0-beta.3359` corresponds to the number of merges since the 1.44 beta, but we really want just `.1` for the sole 1.45 beta promotion merge. We don't really need to query the remote beta at all -- `master..HEAD` suffices if we assume that we're on the intended beta branch already.
…nas-schievink validate basic sanity for TerminatorKind r? @jonas-schievink This mainly checks that all `BasicBlock` actually exist. On top of that, it checks that `Call` actually calls something of `FnPtr`/`FnDef` type, and `Assert` has to work on a `bool`. Also `SwitchInt` cannot have an empty target list.
…jasper Revert pr 71840 Revert7 PR rust-lang#71840 to fix issue rust-lang#72470 This will need a backport to beta if we do not want rust-lang#72470 to hit stable.
Count the beta prerelease number just from master We were computing a merge-base between the remote beta and master branches, but this was giving incorrect answers for the first beta if the remote hadn't been pushed yet. For instance, `1.45.0-beta.3359` corresponds to the number of merges since the 1.44 beta, but we really want just `.1` for the sole 1.45 beta promotion merge. We don't really need to query the remote beta at all -- `master..HEAD` suffices if we assume that we're on the intended beta branch already.
…an-DPC Clean up E0644 explanation r? @Dylan-DPC
remove outdated comment r? @matthewjasper
@bors r+ rollup=never p=5 |
📌 Commit b117a39 has been approved by |
☀️ Test successful - checks-azure |
This was a small perf loss. Ignore the @pnkfelix, @RalfJung: your PRs seem the mostly likely causes. Any ideas? |
would recommend branching off to a new issue - makes it easier to track than on a merged pr |
@nnethercote I measured perf impact of MIR validation in #73087, and it came out with "basically no impact". That measurement includes this PR. So I think it's not my PR -- but I might misinterpret. |
Successful merges:
Failed merges:
r? @ghost