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

coverage: Separate initial span extraction from span processing #116409

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 10, 2023

Conversation

Zalathar
Copy link
Contributor

@Zalathar Zalathar commented Oct 4, 2023

One of the main subtasks of coverage instrumentation is looking through MIR to determine a list of source code spans that require coverage counters.

That task is in turn subdivided into a few main steps:

  • Getting the initial spans from MIR statements/terminators
  • Processing the list of spans to merge or truncate nearby spans as necessary
  • Grouping the processed spans by their corresponding coverage graph node

This PR enforces a firmer separation between the first two steps (span extraction and span processing), which ends up slightly simplifying both steps, since they don't need to deal with state that is only meaningful for the other step.


@rustbot label +A-code-coverage

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 4, 2023

r? @WaffleLapkin

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added 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. labels Oct 4, 2023
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 4, 2023

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

@rustbot rustbot added the A-code-coverage Area: Source-based code coverage (-Cinstrument-coverage) label Oct 4, 2023
@Zalathar
Copy link
Contributor Author

Zalathar commented Oct 4, 2023

  • The first patch only moves code and updates imports.
  • The second patch then simplifies the moved code by disconnecting it from CoverageSpansGenerator.
    • This converts a method function to an ordinary function, so there's a lot of indentation churn.
  • The third patch cleans up some unnecessary data structures that were left over from coverage: Remove debug code from the instrumentor #115962.

@WaffleLapkin
Copy link
Member

r? compiler

@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Oct 7, 2023

r? @oli-obk

@rustbot rustbot assigned oli-obk and unassigned davidtwco Oct 7, 2023
By performal initial span extraction in a separate free function, we can remove
some accidental complexity from the main generator code.
This enum was mainly needed to track the precise origin of a span in MIR, for
debug printing purposes. Since the old debug code was removed in rust-lang#115962, we
can replace it with just the span itself.
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Oct 10, 2023

@bors r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 10, 2023

📌 Commit 6c44425 has been approved by oli-obk

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 Oct 10, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 10, 2023

⌛ Testing commit 6c44425 with merge 5c37696...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 10, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: oli-obk
Pushing 5c37696 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Oct 10, 2023
@bors bors merged commit 5c37696 into rust-lang:master Oct 10, 2023
11 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.75.0 milestone Oct 10, 2023
@Zalathar Zalathar deleted the span-extraction branch October 10, 2023 12:31
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (5c37696): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

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)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-4.1% [-4.1%, -4.1%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.3% [-2.7%, -2.0%] 3
All ❌✅ (primary) -4.1% [-4.1%, -4.1%] 1

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 627.172s -> 627.375s (0.03%)
Artifact size: 270.83 MiB -> 270.86 MiB (0.01%)

bors-ferrocene bot added a commit to ferrocene/ferrocene that referenced this pull request Oct 12, 2023
48: Pull upstream master 2023 10 12 r=tshepang a=Dajamante

* rust-lang/rust#113487
* rust-lang/rust#116506
* rust-lang/rust#116448
* rust-lang/rust#116640
  * rust-lang/rust#116627
  * rust-lang/rust#116597
  * rust-lang/rust#116436
  * rust-lang/rust#116315
  * rust-lang/rust#116219
* rust-lang/rust#113218
* rust-lang/rust#115937
* rust-lang/rust#116014
* rust-lang/rust#116623
* rust-lang/rust#112818
* rust-lang/rust#115948
* rust-lang/rust#116622
* rust-lang/rust#116621
  * rust-lang/rust#116612
  * rust-lang/rust#116611
  * rust-lang/rust#116530
  * rust-lang/rust#95967
* rust-lang/rust#116578
* rust-lang/rust#113915
* rust-lang/rust#116605
  * rust-lang/rust#116574
  * rust-lang/rust#116560
  * rust-lang/rust#116559
  * rust-lang/rust#116503
  * rust-lang/rust#116444
  * rust-lang/rust#116250
  * rust-lang/rust#109422
* rust-lang/rust#116598
  * rust-lang/rust#116596
  * rust-lang/rust#116595
  * rust-lang/rust#116589
  * rust-lang/rust#116586
* rust-lang/rust#116551
* rust-lang/rust#116409
* rust-lang/rust#116548
* rust-lang/rust#116366
* rust-lang/rust#109882
* rust-lang/rust#116497
* rust-lang/rust#116532
* rust-lang/rust#116569
  * rust-lang/rust#116561
  * rust-lang/rust#116556
  * rust-lang/rust#116549
  * rust-lang/rust#116543
  * rust-lang/rust#116537
  * rust-lang/rust#115882
* rust-lang/rust#116142
* rust-lang/rust#115238
* rust-lang/rust#116533
* rust-lang/rust#116096
* rust-lang/rust#116468
* rust-lang/rust#116515
* rust-lang/rust#116454
* rust-lang/rust#116183
* rust-lang/rust#116514
* rust-lang/rust#116509
* rust-lang/rust#116487
* rust-lang/rust#116486
* rust-lang/rust#116450
* rust-lang/rust#114623
* rust-lang/rust#116416
* rust-lang/rust#116437
* rust-lang/rust#100806
* rust-lang/rust#116330
* rust-lang/rust#116310
* rust-lang/rust#115583
* rust-lang/rust#116457
* rust-lang/rust#116508
* rust-lang/rust#109214
* rust-lang/rust#116318
* rust-lang/rust#116501
  * rust-lang/rust#116500
  * rust-lang/rust#116458
  * rust-lang/rust#116400
  * rust-lang/rust#116277
* rust-lang/rust#114709
* rust-lang/rust#116492
  * rust-lang/rust#116484
  * rust-lang/rust#116481
  * rust-lang/rust#116474
  * rust-lang/rust#116466
  * rust-lang/rust#116423
  * rust-lang/rust#116297
  * rust-lang/rust#114564
* rust-lang/rust#114811
* rust-lang/rust#116489
* rust-lang/rust#115304

Co-authored-by: Peter Hall <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Emanuele Vannacci <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Neven Villani <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Alex Macleod <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Tamir Duberstein <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Eduardo Sánchez Muñoz <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: koka <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: bors <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Philipp Krones <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Camille GILLOT <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Esteban Küber <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ralf Jung <[email protected]>
bors-ferrocene bot added a commit to ferrocene/ferrocene that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2023
48: Pull upstream master 2023 10 12 r=tshepang a=Dajamante

* rust-lang/rust#113487
* rust-lang/rust#116506
* rust-lang/rust#116448
* rust-lang/rust#116640
  * rust-lang/rust#116627
  * rust-lang/rust#116597
  * rust-lang/rust#116436
  * rust-lang/rust#116315
  * rust-lang/rust#116219
* rust-lang/rust#113218
* rust-lang/rust#115937
* rust-lang/rust#116014
* rust-lang/rust#116623
* rust-lang/rust#112818
* rust-lang/rust#115948
* rust-lang/rust#116622
* rust-lang/rust#116621
  * rust-lang/rust#116612
  * rust-lang/rust#116611
  * rust-lang/rust#116530
  * rust-lang/rust#95967
* rust-lang/rust#116578
* rust-lang/rust#113915
* rust-lang/rust#116605
  * rust-lang/rust#116574
  * rust-lang/rust#116560
  * rust-lang/rust#116559
  * rust-lang/rust#116503
  * rust-lang/rust#116444
  * rust-lang/rust#116250
  * rust-lang/rust#109422
* rust-lang/rust#116598
  * rust-lang/rust#116596
  * rust-lang/rust#116595
  * rust-lang/rust#116589
  * rust-lang/rust#116586
* rust-lang/rust#116551
* rust-lang/rust#116409
* rust-lang/rust#116548
* rust-lang/rust#116366
* rust-lang/rust#109882
* rust-lang/rust#116497
* rust-lang/rust#116532
* rust-lang/rust#116569
  * rust-lang/rust#116561
  * rust-lang/rust#116556
  * rust-lang/rust#116549
  * rust-lang/rust#116543
  * rust-lang/rust#116537
  * rust-lang/rust#115882
* rust-lang/rust#116142
* rust-lang/rust#115238
* rust-lang/rust#116533
* rust-lang/rust#116096
* rust-lang/rust#116468
* rust-lang/rust#116515
* rust-lang/rust#116454
* rust-lang/rust#116183
* rust-lang/rust#116514
* rust-lang/rust#116509
* rust-lang/rust#116487
* rust-lang/rust#116486
* rust-lang/rust#116450
* rust-lang/rust#114623
* rust-lang/rust#116416
* rust-lang/rust#116437
* rust-lang/rust#100806
* rust-lang/rust#116330
* rust-lang/rust#116310
* rust-lang/rust#115583
* rust-lang/rust#116457
* rust-lang/rust#116508
* rust-lang/rust#109214
* rust-lang/rust#116318
* rust-lang/rust#116501
  * rust-lang/rust#116500
  * rust-lang/rust#116458
  * rust-lang/rust#116400
  * rust-lang/rust#116277
* rust-lang/rust#114709
* rust-lang/rust#116492
  * rust-lang/rust#116484
  * rust-lang/rust#116481
  * rust-lang/rust#116474
  * rust-lang/rust#116466
  * rust-lang/rust#116423
  * rust-lang/rust#116297
  * rust-lang/rust#114564
* rust-lang/rust#114811
* rust-lang/rust#116489
* rust-lang/rust#115304

Co-authored-by: Emanuele Vannacci <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Neven Villani <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Alex Macleod <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Tamir Duberstein <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Eduardo Sánchez Muñoz <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: koka <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: bors <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Philipp Krones <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Camille GILLOT <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Esteban Küber <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ralf Jung <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: ShE3py <[email protected]>
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 20, 2023
coverage: Fix inconsistent handling of function signature spans

While doing some more cleanup of `spans`, I noticed a strange inconsistency in how function signatures are handled. Normally the function signature span is treated as though it were executable as part of the start of the function, but in some cases the signature span disappears entirely from coverage, for no obvious reason.

This is caused by the fact that spans created by `CoverageSpan::for_fn_sig` don't add the span to their `merged_spans` field (unlike normal statement/terminator spans). In cases where the span-processing code looks at those merged spans, it thinks the signature span is no longer visible and deletes it.

Adding the signature span to `merged_spans` resolves the inconsistency.

(Prior to rust-lang#116409 this wouldn't have been possible, because there was no case in the old `CoverageStatement` enum representing a signature. Now that `merged_spans` is just a list of spans, that's no longer an obstacle.)
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 21, 2023
…k,cjgillot

coverage: Fix inconsistent handling of function signature spans

While doing some more cleanup of `spans`, I noticed a strange inconsistency in how function signatures are handled. Normally the function signature span is treated as though it were executable as part of the start of the function, but in some cases the signature span disappears entirely from coverage, for no obvious reason.

This is caused by the fact that spans created by `CoverageSpan::for_fn_sig` don't add the span to their `merged_spans` field (unlike normal statement/terminator spans). In cases where the span-processing code looks at those merged spans, it thinks the signature span is no longer visible and deletes it.

Adding the signature span to `merged_spans` resolves the inconsistency.

(Prior to rust-lang#116409 this wouldn't have been possible, because there was no case in the old `CoverageStatement` enum representing a signature. Now that `merged_spans` is just a list of spans, that's no longer an obstacle.)
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 21, 2023
Rollup merge of rust-lang#116974 - Zalathar:signature-spans, r=oli-obk,cjgillot

coverage: Fix inconsistent handling of function signature spans

While doing some more cleanup of `spans`, I noticed a strange inconsistency in how function signatures are handled. Normally the function signature span is treated as though it were executable as part of the start of the function, but in some cases the signature span disappears entirely from coverage, for no obvious reason.

This is caused by the fact that spans created by `CoverageSpan::for_fn_sig` don't add the span to their `merged_spans` field (unlike normal statement/terminator spans). In cases where the span-processing code looks at those merged spans, it thinks the signature span is no longer visible and deletes it.

Adding the signature span to `merged_spans` resolves the inconsistency.

(Prior to rust-lang#116409 this wouldn't have been possible, because there was no case in the old `CoverageStatement` enum representing a signature. Now that `merged_spans` is just a list of spans, that's no longer an obstacle.)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-code-coverage Area: Source-based code coverage (-Cinstrument-coverage) 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-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.

8 participants