This pulls in a commit which uses parallel xz encoding which should
hopefully help shave some time off the dist builders which spend an
inordinate amount of time compressing this data.
Since switching CI to Azure Pipelines it seems that this test seems
to fail more consistently, so let's disable that for now. It helps
that we have less than a week before release - we disallow PRs that
break the tools to land in this period, so this makes landing critical
PRs smoother now.
r? @alexcrichton
Add `--pass $mode` to compiletest through `./x.py`
Adds a flag `--pass $mode` to compiletest, which is exposed through `./x.py`.
When `--pass $mode` is passed, `{check,build,compile,run}-pass` tests will be forced to run under the given `$mode` unless the directive `// ignore-pass` exists in the test file.
The modes are explained in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/61778:
- `check` has the same effect as `cargo check`
- `build` or `compile` have the same effect as `cargo build`
- `run` has the same effect as `cargo run`
On my machine, `./x.py -i test src/test/run-pass --stage 1 --pass check` takes 38 seconds whereas it takes 2 min 7 seconds without `--pass check`.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61712
r? @petrochenkov
Update RLS
Merged PRs:
* fix(cmd): make clear_env_rust_log default to false (https://github.com/rust-lang/rls/pull/1486)
- Retain `RUST_LOG` in `rls --cli` mode
* Pass --file-lines to rustfmt only if specified (https://github.com/rust-lang/rls/pull/1497)
- Fix entire-file formatting when using external rustfmt (specified via `rustfmt_path` config)
* Ensure that --error-format is only passed once to `rustc` (https://github.com/rust-lang/rls/pull/1500)
- Unbreaks RLS when used together with Cargo [pipelining build](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/60988) feature (@alexcrichton I'd consider this a stabilization blocker, mind adding it to the tracking issue for the record? 🙇♂️ )
Speed up tidy
master:
Time (mean ± σ): 3.478 s ± 0.033 s [User: 3.298 s, System: 0.178 s]
Range (min … max): 3.425 s … 3.525 s 10 runs
This PR:
Time (mean ± σ): 1.098 s ± 0.006 s [User: 783.7 ms, System: 310.2 ms]
Range (min … max): 1.092 s … 1.113 s 10 runs
Alleviates https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/59884. For the most part each commit stands on its own. Timings are on warm filesystem cache.
r? @eddyb
compiletest: Introduce `// {check,build,run}-pass` pass modes
Pass UI tests now have three modes
```
// check-pass
// build-pass
// run-pass
```
mirroring equivalent well-known `cargo` commands.
`// check-pass` will compile the test skipping codegen (which is expensive and isn't supposed to fail in most cases).
`// build-pass` will compile and link the test without running it.
`// run-pass` will compile, link and run the test.
Tests without a "pass" annotation are still considered "fail" tests.
Most UI tests would probably want to switch to `check-pass`.
Tests validating codegen would probably want to run the generated code as well and use `run-pass`.
`build-pass` should probably be rare (linking tests?).
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/61755 will provide a way to run the tests with any mode, e.g. bump `check-pass` tests to `run-pass` to satisfy especially suspicious people, and be able to make sure that codegen doesn't breaks in some entirely unexpected way.
Tests marked with any mode are expected to pass with any other mode, if that's not the case for some legitimate reason, then the test should be made a "fail" test rather than a "pass" test.
Perhaps some secondary CI can verify this invariant, but that's not super urgent.
`// compile-pass` still works and is equivalent to `build-pass`.
Why is `// compile-pass` bad - 1) it gives an impression that the test is only compiled, but not linked, 2) it doesn't mirror a cargo command.
It can be removed some time in the future in a separate PR.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61712
