move core::hint::black_box under its own feature gate#84216
move core::hint::black_box under its own feature gate#84216bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
Conversation
|
(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
| #[cfg_attr(not(miri), inline)] | ||
| #[cfg_attr(miri, inline(never))] | ||
| #[unstable(feature = "test", issue = "50297")] | ||
| #[unstable(feature = "bench_black_box", issue = "64102")] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hm, shouldn't this not use bench in the name? Is black_box taken?
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 03900e4 has been approved by |
move core::hint::black_box under its own feature gate The `black_box` function had its own RFC and is tracked separately from the `test` feature at rust-lang#64102. Let's reflect this in the feature gate. To avoid breaking all the benchmarks, libtest's `test::black_box` is a wrapping definition, not a reexport -- this means it is still under the `test` feature gate.
move core::hint::black_box under its own feature gate The `black_box` function had its own RFC and is tracked separately from the `test` feature at rust-lang#64102. Let's reflect this in the feature gate. To avoid breaking all the benchmarks, libtest's `test::black_box` is a wrapping definition, not a reexport -- this means it is still under the `test` feature gate.
move core::hint::black_box under its own feature gate The `black_box` function had its own RFC and is tracked separately from the `test` feature at rust-lang#64102. Let's reflect this in the feature gate. To avoid breaking all the benchmarks, libtest's `test::black_box` is a wrapping definition, not a reexport -- this means it is still under the `test` feature gate.
move core::hint::black_box under its own feature gate The `black_box` function had its own RFC and is tracked separately from the `test` feature at rust-lang#64102. Let's reflect this in the feature gate. To avoid breaking all the benchmarks, libtest's `test::black_box` is a wrapping definition, not a reexport -- this means it is still under the `test` feature gate.
move core::hint::black_box under its own feature gate The `black_box` function had its own RFC and is tracked separately from the `test` feature at rust-lang#64102. Let's reflect this in the feature gate. To avoid breaking all the benchmarks, libtest's `test::black_box` is a wrapping definition, not a reexport -- this means it is still under the `test` feature gate.
|
@bors r- Failed in rollup: #84477 (comment) |
|
I grepped the sanitizer tests and they should be all good now... |
|
📌 Commit 56c0fb6 has been approved by |
move core::hint::black_box under its own feature gate The `black_box` function had its own RFC and is tracked separately from the `test` feature at rust-lang#64102. Let's reflect this in the feature gate. To avoid breaking all the benchmarks, libtest's `test::black_box` is a wrapping definition, not a reexport -- this means it is still under the `test` feature gate.
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #84310) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
|
CI failure looks spurious:
@bors r=Mark-Simulacrum |
|
📌 Commit 3d16e15 has been approved by |
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Tested on commit rust-lang/rust@06f0adb. Direct link to PR: <rust-lang/rust#84216> 💔 miri on windows: test-pass → test-fail (cc @oli-obk @RalfJung @eddyb). 💔 miri on linux: test-pass → test-fail (cc @oli-obk @RalfJung @eddyb).
The
black_boxfunction had its own RFC and is tracked separately from thetestfeature at #64102. Let's reflect this in the feature gate.To avoid breaking all the benchmarks, libtest's
test::black_boxis a wrapping definition, not a reexport -- this means it is still under thetestfeature gate.