Skip to content

Conversation

@Enselic
Copy link
Member

@Enselic Enselic commented Jan 20, 2026

To make tests/debuginfo/basic-stepping.rs pass.

Note that we must keep SingleUseConsts enabled for tests/ui-fulldeps/rustc_public/check_allocation.rs since its fn collect_consts() assumes that:

VarDebugInfo {
    name: "_false",
    [...]
    value: Place(
        _5,
    ),
}

is transformed into the following which is what SingleUseConsts does:

VarDebugInfo {
    name: "_false",
    [...]
    value: Const(
        [...]
    ),
}

Closes: #33013

CC author @celinval and reviewer @ouz-a of 0a0e7e6 as they may help determine if the fix to tests/ui-fulldeps/rustc_public/check_allocation.rs is acceptable or if some other change is needed.

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jan 20, 2026
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@Enselic Enselic changed the title compiler: Require mir-opt-level > 2 for SingleUseConsts compiler: Require mir-opt-level > 1 for SingleUseConsts Jan 20, 2026
@Enselic Enselic force-pushed the single-use-consts-mir-opt-level branch from 3c16dbc to 2be3ec0 Compare January 20, 2026 19:51
@Enselic Enselic force-pushed the single-use-consts-mir-opt-level branch from 2be3ec0 to 6b292c7 Compare January 21, 2026 05:47
@Enselic Enselic changed the title compiler: Require mir-opt-level > 1 for SingleUseConsts compiler: Require mir-opt-level > 1 for SingleUseConsts Jan 21, 2026
@Enselic Enselic changed the title compiler: Require mir-opt-level > 1 for SingleUseConsts compiler: Require mir-opt-level > 1 for SingleUseConsts Jan 21, 2026
@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

To make `tests/debuginfo/basic-stepping.rs` pass.

Note that we must keep `SingleUseConsts` enabled for
`tests/ui-fulldeps/rustc_public/check_allocation.rs` since its
`fn collect_consts()` assumes that:

    VarDebugInfo {
        name: "_false",
        [...]
        value: Place(
            _5,
        ),
    }

is transformed into which is what `SingleUseConsts` does:

    VarDebugInfo {
        name: "_false",
        [...]
        value: Const(
            [...]
        ),
    }
@Enselic Enselic force-pushed the single-use-consts-mir-opt-level branch from 6b292c7 to d7fffab Compare January 22, 2026 05:15
@Enselic Enselic changed the title compiler: Require mir-opt-level > 1 for SingleUseConsts compiler: Require mir_opt_level > 1 for SingleUseConsts MIR pass Jan 22, 2026
@Enselic Enselic marked this pull request as ready for review January 22, 2026 06:39
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 22, 2026

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

@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 Jan 22, 2026
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 22, 2026

r? @chenyukang

rustbot has assigned @chenyukang.
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

@Enselic
Copy link
Member Author

Enselic commented Jan 23, 2026

I have an idea for a better fix to check_allocation.rs.

@rustbot author

@rustbot rustbot 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 Jan 23, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. 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.

inconsistent stepping in gdb

4 participants