Expand VisitMachineValues to cover more pointers in the interpreter
Follow-on to https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/pull/2559
This is making me want to write a proc macro 🤔
r? `@RalfJung`
Add flag to specify the number of cpus
Apparently you can't rename a branch from github's website without it closing all your PRs with that branch. So this is just #2545
Don't back up past the caller when looking for an FnEntry span
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2536
This adds a fix for the logic as well as a regression test. In the new test `tests/fail/stacked_borrows/fnentry_invalidation2.rs`, before this PR, we display this diagnostic:
```
help: <3278> was later invalidated at offsets [0x0..0xc] by a Unique FnEntry retag
--> tests/fail/stacked_borrows/fnentry_invalidation2.rs:13:5
|
13 | inner(&mut t);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
Which is very misleading. It is not this call itself, but what happens within the call that invalidates the tag we want. With this PR, we get:
```
help: <2798> was later invalidated at offsets [0x0..0xc] by a Unique FnEntry retag inside this call
--> tests/fail/stacked_borrows/fnentry_invalidation2.rs:20:13
|
20 | let _ = t.sli.as_mut_ptr();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
Which is much better.
Distribute rust-docs-json via rustup.
I am not 100% sure on how to treat `rust-json-docs` in `target_host_combination`. I went along with a similar strategy to the one used for `rust-docs`, but looking for guidance there.
Update rustc's information on Android's sanitizers
This patch updates sanitizer support definitions for Android inside the compiler. It also adjusts the logic to make sure no pre-built sanitizer runtime libraries are emitted as these are instead provided dynamically on Android targets.
Don't crate-locally reexport walk functions in tidy
I've moved the walk functions into their own module in #100591 and didn't want to make changing the paths everywhere in tidy part of the PRs diff, so I just reexported the functions locally. This PR removes the crate-local reexport and instead does module level reexports. I'm not sure how much it's worth it and whether the new state is better, idk. Feel free to have any opinion on this.
Avoid panicking on missing fallback
This just prints a message but continues on if a fallback is missing, which can happen when we're building a partial set of builders and producing a dev-static build from it (e.g., when no Apple builder runs at all).
Probably the more extensive fix is to allow the build-manifest invoker to specify the expected set of targets & hosts, but that's a far more extensive change. The main risk from this is that we accidentally start falling back to linux docs across all platforms without noticing. I'm not sure that we can do much about that though at this time.
cc `@ehuss` since IIRC you participated in adding this system
This comes up when building a test nightly from a try build, e.g., https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/101855#issuecomment-1250123298. For now I'm going to manually cherry pick this onto that PR for testing purposes.
This just prints a message but continues on if a fallback is missing,
which can happen when we're building a partial set of builders and
producing a dev-static build from it (e.g., when no Apple builder runs
at all).
Probably the more extensive fix is to allow the build-manifest invoker
to specify the expected set of targets & hosts, but that's a far more
extensive change. The main risk from this is that we accidentally start
falling back to linux docs across all platforms without noticing. I'm
not sure that we can do much about that though at this time.
This patch updates sanitizier support definitions for Android inside the
compiler. It also adjusts the logic to make sure no pre-built sanitizer
runtime libraries are emitted as these are instead provided dynamically
on Android targets.
