Skip to content

Not lint pub structs without pub constructors intentionally #128104

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
bors merged 1 commit into from
Jul 30, 2024
Merged

Not lint pub structs without pub constructors intentionally #128104

bors merged 1 commit into from
Jul 30, 2024

Conversation

@mu001999
Copy link
Contributor

@mu001999 mu001999 commented Jul 23, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Fixes #128053

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jul 23, 2024

r? @petrochenkov

rustbot has assigned @petrochenkov.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added 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 23, 2024
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@mu001999 mu001999 force-pushed the fix/128053 branch 4 times, most recently from 23d37e3 to 7fcaefe Compare July 24, 2024 01:34
@bors

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view
@mu001999
Not lint pub structs without pub constructors if containing fields of…
adf0dff 
… unit, never type, PhantomData and positional ZST
petrochenkov
petrochenkov reviewed Jul 29, 2024
View reviewed changes
@petrochenkov petrochenkov added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jul 29, 2024
@mu001999 mu001999 requested a review from petrochenkov July 29, 2024 15:02
@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jul 29, 2024
@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

petrochenkov commented Jul 29, 2024

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 29, 2024

📌 Commit adf0dff has been approved by petrochenkov

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 29, 2024
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Jul 29, 2024
Merged
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 29, 2024
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#128360 - matthiaskrgr:rollup-wwy5mkj, r=matth…
368e2fd 
…iaskrgr

Rollup of 6 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#126247 (rustdoc: word wrap CamelCase in the item list table and sidebar)
 - rust-lang#128104 (Not lint pub structs without pub constructors intentionally)
 - rust-lang#128153 (Stop using `MoveDataParamEnv` for places that don't need a param-env)
 - rust-lang#128284 (Stabilize offset_of_nested)
 - rust-lang#128342 (simplify the use of `CiEnv`)
 - rust-lang#128355 (triagebot: make sure Nora is called Nora)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 91b18a0 into rust-lang:master Jul 30, 2024
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.82.0 milestone Jul 30, 2024
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 30, 2024
@rust-timer
Unrolled build for rust-lang#128104
dc46839 
Rollup merge of rust-lang#128104 - mu001999-contrib:fix/128053, r=petrochenkov

Not lint pub structs without pub constructors intentionally

Fixes rust-lang#128053
@Kobzol
Copy link
Member

Kobzol commented Jul 30, 2024

@rust-timer build dc46839

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

rust-timer commented Jul 30, 2024

Finished benchmarking commit (dc46839): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

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

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 4.6% [2.0%, 12.0%] 10
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -0.3% [-0.3%, -0.3%] 4
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.3% [-0.3%, -0.3%] 4

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary 7.2%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 7.2% [7.2%, 7.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

Results (secondary 5.4%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 5.4% [2.1%, 14.8%] 9
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 769.793s -> 769.46s (-0.04%)
Artifact size: 331.78 MiB -> 331.84 MiB (0.02%)

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression Performance regression. label Jul 30, 2024
@Kobzol
Copy link
Member

Kobzol commented Jul 30, 2024

This PR seems to have introduced a non-trivial regression for structs with a lot of fields. Do you think that there is something that can be done here to win back the perf. loss?

@mu001999
Copy link
Contributor Author

mu001999 commented Jul 30, 2024

@Kobzol oh yes, I think I can open a new PR

@mu001999 mu001999 mentioned this pull request Jul 30, 2024
Closed
@compiler-errors compiler-errors mentioned this pull request Jul 30, 2024
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@petrochenkov petrochenkov petrochenkov approved these changes

Assignees

@petrochenkov petrochenkov

Labels

perf-regression Performance regression. 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

Milestone

1.82.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

dead-code false positive on named structs with a never field

7 participants

@mu001999 @rustbot @rust-log-analyzer @bors @petrochenkov @Kobzol @rust-timer