Skip to content
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.

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

Revert "Forbid inlining thread_local!'s __getit function on Windows" #104855

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 25, 2022

Conversation

thomcc
Copy link
Member

@thomcc thomcc commented Nov 25, 2022

Revert of #101368, fixes #104852.

I'd rather not do this since that's a soundness fix and this is hitting some compiler bug, but I don't really know an alternative.

r? @ChrisDenton

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Nov 25, 2022
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Nov 25, 2022

Hey! It looks like you've submitted a new PR for the library teams!

If this PR contains changes to any rust-lang/rust public library APIs then please comment with @rustbot label +T-libs-api -T-libs to tag it appropriately. If this PR contains changes to any unstable APIs please edit the PR description to add a link to the relevant API Change Proposal or create one if you haven't already. If you're unsure where your change falls no worries, just leave it as is and the reviewer will take a look and make a decision to forward on if necessary.

Examples of T-libs-api changes:

  • Stabilizing library features
  • Introducing insta-stable changes such as new implementations of existing stable traits on existing stable types
  • Introducing new or changing existing unstable library APIs (excluding permanently unstable features / features without a tracking issue)
  • Changing public documentation in ways that create new stability guarantees
  • Changing observable runtime behavior of library APIs

@ChrisDenton
Copy link
Member

Oh hm. Yeah I think a revert is a good idea for now. Ultimately the TLS issues are a compiler bug so maybe trying to work around them in libs isn't going to be viable.

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 25, 2022

📌 Commit 24712f9 has been approved by ChrisDenton

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 Nov 25, 2022
@thomcc
Copy link
Member Author

thomcc commented Nov 25, 2022

Fixes ThinLTO on windows, so we should not let this sit around the queue for a long time.

@bors p=1

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 25, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 24712f9 with merge af63e3b...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 25, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: ChrisDenton
Pushing af63e3b to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Nov 25, 2022
@bors bors merged commit af63e3b into rust-lang:master Nov 25, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.67.0 milestone Nov 25, 2022
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (af63e3b): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -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)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.4% [-0.4%, -0.4%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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)
1.0% [1.0%, 1.0%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.6% [1.7%, 3.6%] 3
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.0% [1.0%, 1.0%] 1

Cycles

Results

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)
1.4% [1.4%, 1.4%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.4% [2.4%, 2.4%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-1.0% [-1.0%, -1.0%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.2% [-1.0%, 1.4%] 2

@thomcc thomcc deleted the revert-noinline-wintls branch February 8, 2023 19:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. 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.

x86_64-pc-windows-gnu can't link libtest with LTO=thin
5 participants