-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 97
Update toolchain 2025-11-13 #542
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
a731c2d
update toolchain to 2025-11-13, fails
Firestar99 8aed8db
adjust target declaration, conflicts with target declaration refactor
Firestar99 b4c3e49
make build.rs handle macOS non-utf8 metadata files
dvdplm 74877ee
Port backend to newer rustc ABI/target behavior
LegNeato 5819774
Update compiletest baselines for new nightly diagnostics
LegNeato 3bbb1fd
Ignore is-like-gpu in target-spec JSON comparison
LegNeato 6e009cc
Fix clippy single_match_else in call callee type handling
LegNeato File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Some comments aren't visible on the classic Files Changed page.
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ | ||
| [toolchain] | ||
| channel = "nightly-2025-11-02" | ||
| channel = "nightly-2025-11-13" | ||
| components = ["rust-src", "rustc-dev", "llvm-tools"] | ||
| # commit_hash = bd3ac0330018c23b111bbee176f32c377be7b319 | ||
| # commit_hash = 01867557cd7dbe256a031a7b8e28d05daecd75ab | ||
|
|
||
| # Whenever changing the nightly channel, update the commit hash above, and | ||
| # change `REQUIRED_RUST_TOOLCHAIN` in `crates/rustc_codegen_spirv/build.rs` too. |
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this the ultimately the right direction. But I'm really curious as to whether this is actually enough of a change for this to be correct. bjorn3's comment on the other PR: #460 (comment) says that assuming that we can't deal with
PassMode::Indirect, this could technically still make us usePassMode::Indirect.Maybe the assertion got passed since it only checks it when the ABI is not rustic, so Abi::Rust passes it (cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/0b329f801a09004dacb19aaf09d5cb8b4c51d3f8/compiler/rustc_ty_utils/src/abi.rs#L392-L397), but I do think we might want to look into whether or not we have caused more functions to use
PassMode::Indirectand whether we have enough support for that.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So given this, I think this is good enough to go for now, but I'd want to do some testing as to whether something broke. Did the compiletests cover things that should have been covered or are we introducing a regression? I suppose we don't know much but I'm not opposed to just landing this and doing more followup work on it.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The compiletests only check that there are no ICEs and that certain codegen is as expected in the disassembly tests, I don't think we are checking passmode explicitly anywhere (other than not passing pairs and by value stuff as that gets dicey, see #381).
The difftests actually check some runtime behaviors, but they are not nearly exhaustive enough to for us to be confident (they didn't exist until I added them ~6 months ago!).
We have some data this is not completely broken, but we don't have a crater-like tool (and there probably isn't even enough usage to really even have one yet). The flip side of few users also means there is less churn if we get it wrong.