Skip to content

Port #[automatically_derived] to the new attribute parsing infrastructure #143779

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 3 commits into from
Jul 14, 2025

Conversation

JonathanBrouwer
Copy link
Contributor

Ports #[automatically_derived] to the new attribute parsing infrastructure for #131229 (comment)

r? @oli-obk
cc @jdonszelmann

@rustbot rustbot added A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jul 11, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jul 11, 2025

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_passes/src/check_attr.rs

cc @jdonszelmann

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_attr_parsing

cc @jdonszelmann

Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy

cc @rust-lang/clippy

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_attr_data_structures

cc @jdonszelmann

Some changes occurred in match checking

cc @Nadrieril

@@ -1304,6 +1304,7 @@ impl AttributeExt for Attribute {
Attribute::Parsed(AttributeKind::DocComment { span, .. }) => *span,
Attribute::Parsed(AttributeKind::MayDangle(span)) => *span,
Attribute::Parsed(AttributeKind::Ignore { span, .. }) => *span,
Attribute::Parsed(AttributeKind::AutomaticallyDerived(span)) => *span,
Copy link
Contributor Author

@JonathanBrouwer JonathanBrouwer Jul 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This change is needed to fix #143780 for automatically_derived. automatically_derived is part of a test case so this is necessary to add now. @jdonszelmann and I are discussing a general solution to this problem.

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@JonathanBrouwer JonathanBrouwer force-pushed the automatically_derived_parser branch from 8ffd1bf to 499af0e Compare July 11, 2025 11:32
@Kobzol
Copy link
Member

Kobzol commented Jul 11, 2025

There are lots of these attributes produced by built-in derives, let's do a perf. run once this is ready.

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 12, 2025

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #143810) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@JonathanBrouwer JonathanBrouwer force-pushed the automatically_derived_parser branch from 499af0e to 68066b9 Compare July 12, 2025 15:51
@jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jul 12, 2025
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 12, 2025
… r=<try>

Port `#[automatically_derived]` to the new attribute parsing infrastructure

Ports `#[automatically_derived]` to the new attribute parsing infrastructure for #131229 (comment)

r? `@oli-obk`
cc `@jdonszelmann`
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 12, 2025

⌛ Trying commit 68066b9 with merge bc14627...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 12, 2025

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: bc14627 (bc146279bdc1ca321ed03225099bba4299bcd965)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (bc14627): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.1% [-0.1%, -0.1%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.2% [-0.3%, -0.2%] 8
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.1% [-0.1%, -0.1%] 1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.1%, secondary -1.0%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.1% [2.1%, 2.1%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-1.1% [-1.1%, -1.1%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-4.0% [-4.0%, -4.0%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) -1.1% [-1.1%, -1.1%] 1

Cycles

Results (primary 1.4%, secondary 5.8%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.6% [2.3%, 2.8%] 3
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
5.8% [2.4%, 9.2%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-2.2% [-2.2%, -2.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.4% [-2.2%, 2.8%] 4

Binary size

Results (primary -0.1%, secondary -0.4%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.1% [-0.3%, -0.0%] 71
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.4% [-1.8%, -0.0%] 31
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.1% [-0.3%, -0.0%] 71

Bootstrap: 464.174s -> 466.768s (0.56%)
Artifact size: 374.70 MiB -> 374.67 MiB (-0.01%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jul 12, 2025
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Jul 13, 2025

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 13, 2025

📌 Commit 68066b9 has been approved by oli-obk

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jul 13, 2025
@jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor

damn, no regressions?

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 14, 2025

⌛ Testing commit 68066b9 with merge ad635e5...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 14, 2025

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: oli-obk
Pushing ad635e5 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jul 14, 2025
@bors bors merged commit ad635e5 into rust-lang:master Jul 14, 2025
12 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.90.0 milestone Jul 14, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

What is this? This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing 9c3064e (parent) -> ad635e5 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 14 test diffs

14 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard ad635e5d0696076b4412dd7db7b7e8c0867d6e0c --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

  1. x86_64-apple-1: 6198.6s -> 8956.0s (44.5%)
  2. dist-aarch64-linux: 8137.9s -> 5852.0s (-28.1%)
  3. aarch64-apple: 4724.2s -> 5827.1s (23.3%)
  4. dist-apple-various: 6334.9s -> 7527.0s (18.8%)
  5. dist-x86_64-apple: 9338.3s -> 8381.1s (-10.3%)
  6. x86_64-apple-2: 4214.5s -> 3854.9s (-8.5%)
  7. dist-x86_64-musl: 7019.0s -> 7578.3s (8.0%)
  8. dist-aarch64-apple: 5389.4s -> 5807.3s (7.8%)
  9. aarch64-gnu-debug: 4199.5s -> 3934.6s (-6.3%)
  10. pr-check-1: 1679.3s -> 1583.0s (-5.7%)
How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (ad635e5): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.2% [-0.3%, -0.1%] 8
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.3%, secondary -2.4%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
4.7% [1.8%, 7.7%] 4
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-7.5% [-7.5%, -7.5%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.4% [-2.4%, -2.4%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.3% [-7.5%, 7.7%] 5

Cycles

Results (secondary -0.0%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.2% [2.2%, 2.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.3% [-2.3%, -2.3%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

Results (primary -0.1%, secondary -0.4%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.1% [-0.3%, -0.0%] 71
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.4% [-1.8%, -0.0%] 31
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.1% [-0.3%, -0.0%] 71

Bootstrap: 462.57s -> 465.735s (0.68%)
Artifact size: 374.65 MiB -> 374.64 MiB (-0.00%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants