-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.4k
Rollup of 5 pull requests #73081
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
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remove outdated comment r? @matthewjasper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