coverage: Revert "unused local file IDs" due to empty function names #141650
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
Zalathar
added
the
A-code-coverage
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt |
|
Self-approving a clean revert, per https://forge.rust-lang.org/compiler/reviews.html#creating-reverts . @bors r+ rollup |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 27, 2025
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #141312 (Add From<TryLockError> for io::Error) - #141495 (Rename `{GenericArg,Term}::unpack()` to `kind()`) - #141602 (triagebot: label LLVM submodule changes with `A-LLVM`) - #141632 (remove `visit_mt` from `ast::mut_visit`) - #141640 (test: convert version_check ui test to run-make) - #141645 (bump fluent-* crates) - #141650 (coverage: Revert "unused local file IDs" due to empty function names) - #141654 (tests: mark option-niche-eq as fixed on LLVM 21) Failed merges: - #141430 (remove `visit_clobber` and move `DummyAstNode` to `rustc_expand`) - #141636 (avoid some usages of `&mut P<T>` in AST visitors) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 27, 2025
Rollup merge of #141650 - Zalathar:revert-unused-local-file, r=Zalathar coverage: Revert "unused local file IDs" due to empty function names The changes to coverage metadata generation in #140847 appear to be the most likely cause of the `function name is empty` errors reported in #141577. If that guess is correct, great. If not, no big deal. --- This reverts commit 3b22c21, reversing changes made to 5f292ee. r? ghost
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
to rust-lang/miri
that referenced
this pull request
May 28, 2025
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang/rust#141312 (Add From<TryLockError> for io::Error) - rust-lang/rust#141495 (Rename `{GenericArg,Term}::unpack()` to `kind()`) - rust-lang/rust#141602 (triagebot: label LLVM submodule changes with `A-LLVM`) - rust-lang/rust#141632 (remove `visit_mt` from `ast::mut_visit`) - rust-lang/rust#141640 (test: convert version_check ui test to run-make) - rust-lang/rust#141645 (bump fluent-* crates) - rust-lang/rust#141650 (coverage: Revert "unused local file IDs" due to empty function names) - rust-lang/rust#141654 (tests: mark option-niche-eq as fixed on LLVM 21) Failed merges: - rust-lang/rust#141430 (remove `visit_clobber` and move `DummyAstNode` to `rustc_expand`) - rust-lang/rust#141636 (avoid some usages of `&mut P<T>` in AST visitors) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Zalathar
referenced
this pull request
Jul 11, 2025
This allows us to assume that coverage spans will only be discarded during codegen in very unusual situations.
Zalathar
added a commit
to Zalathar/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 31, 2025
coverage: Re-land "Enlarge empty spans during MIR instrumentation" This allows us to assume that coverage spans will only be discarded during codegen in very unusual situations. --- This seemingly-simple change has a rather messy history: - rust-lang#140847 - rust-lang#141650 - rust-lang#144298 - rust-lang#144480 Since then, a number of related changes have landed that should make it reasonable to try again: - rust-lang#144530 - rust-lang#144560 - rust-lang#144616 In particular, we have multiple fixes/mitigations, and a confirmed regression test for the original bug that is not triggered by re-landing the changes in this PR.
Zalathar
added a commit
to Zalathar/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 31, 2025
coverage: Re-land "Enlarge empty spans during MIR instrumentation" This allows us to assume that coverage spans will only be discarded during codegen in very unusual situations. --- This seemingly-simple change has a rather messy history: - rust-lang#140847 - rust-lang#141650 - rust-lang#144298 - rust-lang#144480 Since then, a number of related changes have landed that should make it reasonable to try again: - rust-lang#144530 - rust-lang#144560 - rust-lang#144616 In particular, we have multiple fixes/mitigations, and a confirmed regression test for the original bug that is not triggered by re-landing the changes in this PR.
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 31, 2025
Rollup merge of #144663 - Zalathar:empty-span, r=petrochenkov coverage: Re-land "Enlarge empty spans during MIR instrumentation" This allows us to assume that coverage spans will only be discarded during codegen in very unusual situations. --- This seemingly-simple change has a rather messy history: - #140847 - #141650 - #144298 - #144480 Since then, a number of related changes have landed that should make it reasonable to try again: - #144530 - #144560 - #144616 In particular, we have multiple fixes/mitigations, and a confirmed regression test for the original bug that is not triggered by re-landing the changes in this PR.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
The changes to coverage metadata generation in #140847 appear to be the most likely cause of the
function name is emptyerrors reported in #141577.If that guess is correct, great. If not, no big deal.
This reverts commit 3b22c21, reversing changes made to 5f292ee.
r? ghost