Skip to content

make it possible to run in-tree rustfmt with x run rustfmt #140732

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 8, 2025
Merged

make it possible to run in-tree rustfmt with x run rustfmt #140732

merged 3 commits into from
May 8, 2025

Conversation

onur-ozkan
Copy link
Member

@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan commented May 7, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Currently, there is no way to run in-tree rustfmt using x fmt or x test tidy commands. This PR implements rustfmt on x run, which allows bootstrap to run the in-tree rustfmt.

Fixes #140723
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented May 7, 2025

r? @Kobzol

rustbot has assigned @Kobzol.
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
@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) labels May 7, 2025
@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan force-pushed the use-in-tree-rustfmt branch 2 times, most recently from 87d477b to 0238706 Compare May 7, 2025 08:58
@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan mentioned this pull request May 7, 2025
Closed
@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan force-pushed the use-in-tree-rustfmt branch 2 times, most recently from 9773a4a to 3eaff61 Compare May 7, 2025 20:33
@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan changed the title use in-tree rustfmt if stage > 0 or precompiled one is unavailable May 7, 2025
@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan 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 May 7, 2025
@onur-ozkan
do not allow stage > 0 on x fmt
34c42c8 
Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>
@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan force-pushed the use-in-tree-rustfmt branch from 3eaff61 to 45df91e Compare May 7, 2025 20:39
@onur-ozkan
Copy link
Member Author

@rustbot ready
@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 May 7, 2025
@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan force-pushed the use-in-tree-rustfmt branch from 45df91e to 763876e Compare May 8, 2025 07:16
onur-ozkan added 2 commits May 8, 2025 10:18
@onur-ozkan
implement x run rustfmt
1a18da5 
Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>
@onur-ozkan
add change-entry for x run rustfmt
e85d014 
Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>
@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan force-pushed the use-in-tree-rustfmt branch from 763876e to e85d014 Compare May 8, 2025 07:18
@Kobzol
Copy link
Contributor

Kobzol commented May 8, 2025

Looks great! You can r=me, unless you want to make further changes.
@onur-ozkan
Copy link
Member Author

I am not planning to make further change on this PR.

@bors r=Kobzol
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 8, 2025

📌 Commit e85d014 has been approved by Kobzol

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 May 8, 2025
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request May 8, 2025
@matthiaskrgr
Rollup merge of rust-lang#140732 - onur-ozkan:use-in-tree-rustfmt, r=…
2595e15 
…Kobzol

make it possible to run in-tree rustfmt with `x run rustfmt`

Currently, there is no way to run in-tree `rustfmt` using `x fmt` or `x test tidy` commands. This PR implements `rustfmt` on `x run`, which allows bootstrap to run the in-tree `rustfmt`.

Fixes rust-lang#140723
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request May 8, 2025
Closed
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request May 8, 2025
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#140788 - matthiaskrgr:rollup-rgsbl0h, r=matth…
da378d7 
…iaskrgr

Rollup of 7 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#140716 (Improve `-Zremap-path-scope` tests with dependency)
 - rust-lang#140732 (make it possible to run in-tree rustfmt with `x run rustfmt`)
 - rust-lang#140736 (trait selection: check `&` before suggest remove deref)
 - rust-lang#140755 ([win][arm64] Disable various DebugInfo tests that don't work on Arm64 Windows)
 - rust-lang#140756 ([arm64] Pointer auth test should link with C static library statically)
 - rust-lang#140758 ([win][arm64] Disable MSVC Linker 'Arm Hazard' warning)
 - rust-lang#140759 ([win][arm64] Disable std::fs tests that require symlinks)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 8, 2025

⌛ Testing commit e85d014 with merge e964cca...
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 8, 2025

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Kobzol
Pushing e964cca to master...
@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label May 8, 2025
@bors bors merged commit e964cca into rust-lang:master May 8, 2025
7 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.88.0 milestone May 8, 2025
@onur-ozkan onur-ozkan deleted the use-in-tree-rustfmt branch May 8, 2025 15:09
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 8, 2025

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 1973872 (parent) -> e964cca (this PR)

Test differences

No test diffs found

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard e964ccafedcf7a505f90f31370d568e649286176 --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-apple-2: 4586.5s -> 6125.7s (33.6%)
  2. dist-x86_64-apple: 7162.9s -> 8945.0s (24.9%)
  3. dist-aarch64-apple: 5462.2s -> 6267.0s (14.7%)
  4. dist-apple-various: 6861.8s -> 7813.1s (13.9%)
  5. aarch64-apple: 4166.3s -> 4520.0s (8.5%)
  6. x86_64-msvc-ext1: 7281.7s -> 7829.3s (7.5%)
  7. dist-powerpc-linux: 5600.7s -> 5248.2s (-6.3%)
  8. x86_64-gnu-aux: 6420.5s -> 6062.5s (-5.6%)
  9. x86_64-gnu-debug: 6101.4s -> 6441.0s (5.6%)
  10. dist-ohos: 10626.8s -> 11141.1s (4.8%)
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
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (e964cca): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 0.1% [0.1%, 0.1%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 0.2%, secondary 2.3%)

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)		 9.3% [9.3%, 9.3%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 5.3% [5.3%, 5.3%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -1.1% [-4.0%, -0.5%] 7
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -0.6% [-0.6%, -0.6%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.2% [-4.0%, 9.3%] 8

Cycles

Results (primary 0.2%, secondary 2.3%)

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)		 0.6% [0.4%, 0.8%] 4
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 2.3% [2.3%, 2.3%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -0.5% [-0.5%, -0.5%] 2
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.2% [-0.5%, 0.8%] 6

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 771.841s -> 772.853s (0.13%)
Artifact size: 365.34 MiB -> 365.33 MiB (-0.00%)
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-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap)
5 participants
@onur-ozkan @rustbot @Kobzol @bors @rust-timer