Stream: t-compiler

Topic: pre-meeting triage 2019-04-11 #54818


pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:13, on Zulip):

This weeks pre-triage will be tracked here.

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:14, on Zulip):

first prepass: nominated unprioritized T-compiler issues

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:15, on Zulip):

first one: "ICE in src/librustc/ty/query/plumbing.rs when compiling incrementally" #59716

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:15, on Zulip):

ICE, tagging P-high.

Zoxc (Apr 11 2019 at 13:17, on Zulip):

That should be fixed?

Zoxc (Apr 11 2019 at 13:17, on Zulip):

By https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/59723

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:18, on Zulip):

that PR has very little information about its visible effects to end users

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:19, on Zulip):

i cannot tell if this is the sort of bug that we could even have a regression test for

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:19, on Zulip):

we do have incremental tests, but I cannot tell if this particular one works with those

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:19, on Zulip):

in any case I'll make a note

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:20, on Zulip):

next: " Implement "pipelined" rustc compilation (compiler side)" #58465

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:20, on Zulip):

there is now a WG-pipelining

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:22, on Zulip):

removing nominated tag due to that (and made a comment summarizing the status of things as I understand it)

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:23, on Zulip):

that's all from that prepass

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:23, on Zulip):

Next prepass: there are zero nominated bugs with no team assigned

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:24, on Zulip):

Next prepass: there are zero unprioritized T-compiler beta-regressions

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:25, on Zulip):

Last prepass: there is one unprioritized T-compiler nightly regression

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:29, on Zulip):

gave it a more information name: "regression: conflicting trait impls because Box<dyn Fn*> now implements Fn*." #59750

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:30, on Zulip):

this wasn't actually tagged with any team

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:30, on Zulip):

and I do not know if its a T-libs thing or a T-compiler thing

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:35, on Zulip):

forwarded to weekly meeting topic

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:35, on Zulip):

next up: we have 18 P-high T-compiler issues

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:36, on Zulip):

I'll skip #59750 and #59716 since I just went through them. (Though they both remain unassigned, which arguably should be addressed.)

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:36, on Zulip):

next: "[firefox] error: relocation refers to local symbol "" [12], which is defined in a discarded section" #59652

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:37, on Zulip):

people have been trying to work on this

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:37, on Zulip):

but no one is assigned

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:37, on Zulip):

vorner asked in a recent comment if they should try finding some more info

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:40, on Zulip):

leaving nominated for now

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:41, on Zulip):

next: "ripgrep fails to build with MUSL on Linux since the nightly release on 2019-03-15" #59411

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:42, on Zulip):

from reading the comments there, I am starting to wonder if this is possibly a T-infra bug to resolve in some manner? The fact that its so hard to reproduce via local builds seems pretty fishy

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:43, on Zulip):

in any case it does seem like mati865 and alexcrichton are making some amount of progress here

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:44, on Zulip):

next: "LNK1189 "library limit of 65535 obj exceeded" building rustc" #53014

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:45, on Zulip):

I am still in the process of trying to get myself a usable Windows development environment.

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:45, on Zulip):

(I do have rustc bootstrapped now atop VirtualBox, but the performance of VirtualBox seems pretty bad for some reason. I'm hoping to have dedicated Windows hardware soon, maybe next week.)

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:46, on Zulip):

next: "ICE in librustc_codegen_llvm when building kernel" #59548

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:46, on Zulip):

thepowersgang has provided a minimal reproduction for the ICE

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:48, on Zulip):

hmm:

#![feature(linkage)]
#[linkage="external"]
pub static EXTERN: u32 = 0;

I think I've seen this discussed elsewhere.

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:48, on Zulip):

next: "[nll] change how MIR represents places" #52708

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:49, on Zulip):

I'm downgrading this to P-medium.

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:50, on Zulip):

next: "Rustc 1.33 stable panicked on a closure inside a closure" #58840

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:51, on Zulip):

sigh. I made a comment here about grabbing an example from #59344 to witness the ICE in question, and then dropped the ball beyond that. Sorry all.

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:51, on Zulip):

next: "rustc 1.32.0 produces faulty wasm code" #58548

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:52, on Zulip):

sigh. I made a comment here about grabbing an example from #59344 to witness the ICE in question, and then dropped the ball beyond that. Sorry all.

(its possible that #58840 should be downgraded to P-medium? I'll need to review.)

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:53, on Zulip):

but: "rustc 1.32.0 produces faulty wasm code" #58548

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:53, on Zulip):

I tried to give some guidance to the bug filer last week about how they might resolve their cargo deps issue with trying to check whether the bug is fixed

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:55, on Zulip):

I don't know whether I want to take the time to double-check against their factored out test crate, since it requires something called yarn that I am not familiar with

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:55, on Zulip):

next: "Nightly rustc crashes with "unexpected region in query response" #57464

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:55, on Zulip):

I haven't made any recent progress here

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:56, on Zulip):

next: "Compiler panic with generic-typed nested closures" #59494

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:58, on Zulip):

forwarded over to main meeting topic

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:58, on Zulip):

next: "[NLL] prohibit "two-phase borrows" with existing borrows?" #56254

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:58, on Zulip):

I think this is resolved now?

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 13:58, on Zulip):

it certainly isn't P-high anymore now that the lint has landed

centril (Apr 11 2019 at 14:00, on Zulip):

@pnkfelix yep; linked from the c-future-compat issue so I think we can close

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 14:01, on Zulip):

well the question itself arguably remains open

pnkfelix (Apr 11 2019 at 14:02, on Zulip):

six P-high issues remain, but I think they do not need to be addressed now.

centril (Apr 11 2019 at 14:10, on Zulip):

@pnkfelix yea sure, I mainly thought we'd track the question in the c-future-compat issue but maybe not ^^

Last update: Nov 22 2019 at 04:35UTC