Skip to content

Rollup of 3 pull requests#155270

Merged
rust-bors[bot] merged 7 commits intorust-lang:mainfrom
jhpratt:rollup-Djg7HpJ
Apr 14, 2026
Merged

Rollup of 3 pull requests#155270
rust-bors[bot] merged 7 commits intorust-lang:mainfrom
jhpratt:rollup-Djg7HpJ

Conversation

@jhpratt
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@jhpratt jhpratt commented Apr 14, 2026

Successful merges:

r? @ghost

Create a similar rollup

Piotr Spieker and others added 7 commits April 12, 2026 14:22
…uct-like enum variants

This closer follows the terminology used in the Rust Book and Reference.

[Rust Book](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/book/ch06-01-defining-an-enum.html#listing-6-2):
> named fields, like a struct

[Reference](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference/items/enumerations.html#r-items.enum.constructor):
> struct-like enum variant
and provide it to LLVM for better optimization
…_docs, r=ChrisDenton

Use the term struct-like variant instead of anonymous structs for data of struct-like enum variants

The current term in the docs `anonymous structs` seems to be outdated.
I'd suggest `struct-like data` or rephrasing the whole sentence to use `struct-like variant`.

The terminology used in the [Rust Book on enums](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/book/ch06-01-defining-an-enum.html#listing-6-2) is
> named fields, like a struct

The [Reference on enums](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference/items/enumerations.html#r-items.enum.constructor) uses
> struct-like enum variant

The term `anonymous struct` on the other hand is neither mentioned in the Rust book on [structs](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/book/ch05-01-defining-structs.html) or [enums](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/book/ch06-01-defining-an-enum.html#listing-6-2), nor the references on [structs](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference/items/structs.html) or [enums](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference/items/enumerations.html#r-items.enum.constructor).
… r=nnethercote

preserve SIMD element type information

Preserve the SIMD element type and provide it to LLVM for better optimization.

This is relevant for AArch64 types like `int16x4x2_t`, see also llvm/llvm-project#181514. Such types are defined like so:

```rust
#[repr(simd)]
struct int16x4_t([i16; 4]);

#[repr(C)]
struct int16x4x2_t(pub int16x4_t, pub int16x4_t);
```

Previously this would be translated to the opaque `[2 x <8 x i8>]`, with this PR it is instead `[2 x <4 x i16>]`. That change is not relevant for the ABI, but using the correct type prevents bitcasts that can (indeed, do) confuse the LLVM pattern matcher.

This change will make it possible to implement the deinterleaving loads on AArch64 in a portable way (without neon-specific intrinsics), which means that e.g. Miri or the cranelift backend can run them without additional support.

discussion at [#t-compiler > loss of vector element type information](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/131828-t-compiler/topic/loss.20of.20vector.20element.20type.20information/with/584483611)
@rust-bors rust-bors bot added the rollup A PR which is a rollup label Apr 14, 2026
@rustbot rustbot added A-LLVM Area: Code generation parts specific to LLVM. Both correctness bugs and optimization-related issues. 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. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Apr 14, 2026
@jhpratt
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

jhpratt commented Apr 14, 2026

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

@rust-bors
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Apr 14, 2026

📌 Commit ec3a6b4 has been approved by jhpratt

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@rust-bors rust-bors bot 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 Apr 14, 2026
@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-bors rust-bors bot added merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Apr 14, 2026
@rust-bors
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Apr 14, 2026

☀️ Test successful - CI
Approved by: jhpratt
Duration: 3h 22m 30s
Pushing 7db0ab4 to main...

@rust-bors rust-bors bot merged commit 7db0ab4 into rust-lang:main Apr 14, 2026
12 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.97.0 milestone Apr 14, 2026
@rust-timer
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Message Perf Build Sha
#152530 Use the term struct-like variant instead of anonymous struc… 435808e3f9cb147c9dd757f93daa55bc4e439c57 (link)
#155005 preserve SIMD element type information f53af8d46456a9496ec9807d4e694fbd53ed3441 (link)
#155230 Avoid linting doc_cfg as unused in rustc 15e9f2fe4d334148d21fa9066f0c8fea11d1e85d (link)

previous master: 0006519783

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
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 0006519 (parent) -> 7db0ab4 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 7 test diffs

Stage 1

  • [assembly] tests/assembly-llvm/aarch64-vld2-s16.rs: [missing] -> ignore (only executed when the target is aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) (J1)
  • [ui] tests/ui/lint/unused-features/used-doc-cfg.rs: [missing] -> pass (J1)
  • [codegen] tests/codegen-llvm/preserve-vec-element-types.rs: [missing] -> pass (J5)

Stage 2

  • [codegen] tests/codegen-llvm/preserve-vec-element-types.rs: [missing] -> pass (J0)
  • [assembly] tests/assembly-llvm/aarch64-vld2-s16.rs: [missing] -> ignore (only executed when the target is aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) (J2)
  • [ui] tests/ui/lint/unused-features/used-doc-cfg.rs: [missing] -> pass (J3)
  • [assembly] tests/assembly-llvm/aarch64-vld2-s16.rs: [missing] -> pass (J4)

Job group index

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 7db0ab43a7f248268e6460b96a955e3d420b485d --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-gnu-llvm-22-1: 57m 10s -> 1h 12m (+26.7%)
  2. dist-x86_64-apple: 1h 43m -> 2h 11m (+26.1%)
  3. x86_64-gnu-debug: 2h 3m -> 2h 22m (+15.2%)
  4. dist-aarch64-apple: 2h 4m -> 1h 47m (-13.0%)
  5. dist-x86_64-llvm-mingw: 1h 47m -> 1h 55m (+7.8%)
  6. i686-msvc-2: 2h 1m -> 2h 10m (+7.6%)
  7. x86_64-msvc-ext2: 1h 45m -> 1h 53m (+7.3%)
  8. x86_64-gnu-stable: 2h 19m -> 2h 29m (+7.1%)
  9. i686-msvc-1: 3h 2m -> 2h 49m (-7.0%)
  10. dist-aarch64-linux: 1h 47m -> 1h 54m (+6.1%)
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
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (7db0ab4): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Cycles

Results (secondary 5.9%)

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)
5.9% [5.9%, 5.9%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 491.89s -> 489.054s (-0.58%)
Artifact size: 394.24 MiB -> 394.23 MiB (-0.00%)

@jhpratt jhpratt deleted the rollup-Djg7HpJ branch April 16, 2026 02:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

A-LLVM Area: Code generation parts specific to LLVM. Both correctness bugs and optimization-related issues. merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. rollup A PR which is a rollup T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants