Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 31 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upRemove obsolete no_stack_check attribute and test #34915
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
The test probably should go. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I think its also a time to deprecate the attribute by now. cc @rust-lang/compiler @rust-lang/lang |
eddyb
added
T-compiler
I-nominated
labels
Jul 19, 2016
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
If the attribute doesn't have any effect anymore, the test case should be removed (while making sure that's it's still possible to break on a function, which might mean that we have to write another test case if that isn't covered anywhere else). |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
fwiw, this test does pass on x86, x86-64 and even arm64 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
It seems odd that the test is failing in this context, but not in the other targets that @infinity0 mentioned. Nonetheless, the compiler team concluded we should:
|
pnkfelix
removed
the
I-nominated
label
Jul 21, 2016
nikomatsakis
added
the
E-mentor
label
Jul 21, 2016
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I'll happily mentor someone to do this. |
brson
added
the
E-easy
label
Jul 22, 2016
brson
changed the title
debuginfo/function-prologue-stepping-no-stack-check fails on armv7 hf
Delete obsolete no_stack_check attribute and test
Jul 22, 2016
brson
changed the title
Delete obsolete no_stack_check attribute and test
Remove obsolete no_stack_check attribute and test
Jul 22, 2016
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I can work on this. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
So this is as simple as just deleting |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
You’ll also need to remove this flag. Getting the things you mentioned along with this flag deleted sounds correct. |
This was referenced Jul 25, 2016
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I created three different pull requests because i did not know how to create a single pull request for multiple files. How can i do this in the future? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Did you perhaps make the PRs using github’s edit file feature? I do not think that feature was ever meant for anything more than quickly changing a typo in a single file. The proper workflow (which allows for multi-file patches as well) is to:
There a number of tutorials on how to get started with this workflow on the internet. In no particular order: 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5. |
steveklabnik
added a commit
to steveklabnik/rust
that referenced
this issue
Jul 25, 2016
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 26, 2016
steveklabnik
added a commit
to steveklabnik/rust
that referenced
this issue
Jul 26, 2016
abhijeetbhagat
referenced this issue
Aug 1, 2016
Closed
Change description of no-stack-check (#34915) #35156
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
What's still missing here? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
karpinski
added a commit
to karpinski/rust
that referenced
this issue
Nov 7, 2016
karpinski
referenced this issue
Nov 7, 2016
Merged
Marking the 'no-stack-check' codegen option as deprecated (Issue #34915) #37636
karpinski
added a commit
to karpinski/rust
that referenced
this issue
Nov 8, 2016
eddyb
added a commit
to eddyb/rust
that referenced
this issue
Nov 9, 2016
nagisa
referenced this issue
Jan 8, 2017
Merged
Avoid large number of stage 0 warnings about --no-stack-check #38923
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@mgattozzi Yes, looks like it. Thanks for the reminder! |
michaelwoerister
closed this
Jan 13, 2017
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
No. We still need to remove the flag. Please reopen. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Oh, I thought the issue was just about the test, sorry. |
michaelwoerister
reopened this
Jan 13, 2017
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This issue was fixed in PR #37636. I believe this should be closed. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
per @danobi's comment, closing |
infinity0 commentedJul 19, 2016
Here is the start of the failure
After this basically everything is broken which you can see in more detail here. However, I see that
no_stack_checkisn't used in the code anywhere any more - there is only onegrepresult forstack[-_]checkthat excludes this test itself, and one of them says this:So I wonder if this test should just be gotten rid of?