Add -Z maximal-hir-to-mir-coverage flag
This PR adds a new unstable flag `-Z maximal-hir-to-mir-coverage` that changes the behavior of `maybe_lint_level_root_bounded`, pursuant to [a discussion on Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Mapping.20MIR.20to.20HIR). When enabled, this function will not search upwards for a lint root, but rather immediately return the provided HIR node ID. This change increases the granularity of the mapping between MIR locations and HIR nodes inside the `SourceScopeLocalData` data structures. This increase in granularity is useful for rustc consumers like [Flowistry](https://github.com/willcrichton/flowistry) that rely on getting source-mapping information about the MIR CFG that is as precise as possible.
A test `maximal_mir_to_hir_coverage.rs` has been added to verify that this flag does not break anything.
r? `@cjgillot`
cc `@gavinleroy`
feed resolver_for_lowering instead of storing it in a field
r? `@cjgillot`
opening this as
* a discussion for `no_hash` + `feedable` queries. I think we'll want those, but I don't quite understand why they are rejected beyond a double check of the stable hashes for situations where the query is fed but also read from incremental caches.
* and a discussion on removing all untracked fields from TyCtxt and setting it up so that they are fed queries instead
Use `as_deref` in compiler (but only where it makes sense)
This simplifies some code :3
(there are some changes that are not exacly `as_deref`, but more like "clever `Option`/`Result` method use")
Previously, rustdoc would unconditionally report the version that *rustc* was compiled with.
That showed things like `nightly-2022-10-30`, which wasn't right, since this was a `dev` build compiled from source.
Fix it by changing `rustc_driver::version` to a macro expanded at invocation time.
improve `filesearch::get_or_default_sysroot`
`fn get_or_default_sysroot` is now improved and used in `miri` and `clippy`, and tests are still passing as they should. So we no longer need to implement custom workarounds/hacks to find sysroot in tools like miri/clippy.
Resolves https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/98832
re-opened from #103581
Track where diagnostics were created.
This implements the `-Ztrack-diagnostics` flag, which uses `#[track_caller]` to track where diagnostics are created. It is meant as a debugging tool much like `-Ztreat-err-as-bug`.
For example, the following code...
```rust
struct A;
struct B;
fn main(){
let _: A = B;
}
```
...now emits the following error message:
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> src\main.rs:5:16
|
5 | let _: A = B;
| - ^ expected struct `A`, found struct `B`
| |
| expected due to this
-Ztrack-diagnostics: created at compiler\rustc_infer\src\infer\error_reporting\mod.rs:2275:31
```
spastorino noticed some silly expressions like `item_id.def_id.def_id`.
This commit renames several `def_id: OwnerId` fields as `owner_id`, so
those expressions become `item_id.owner_id.def_id`.
`item_id.owner_id.local_def_id` would be even clearer, but the use of
`def_id` for values of type `LocalDefId` is *very* widespread, so I left
that alone.
move hir typeck into separate crate
second part https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/529
I avoided pretty much anything that wasn't just a simple move + path adjustment. Left fixmes for methods which are at an odd place
r? `@compiler-errors`
- Make the structure of the two variants more similar.
- Add some comments.
- Move various conditional `use` items inside the function that uses
them.
- Inline some closures.
Remove `-Ztime`
Because it has a lot of overlap with `-Ztime-passes` but is generally less useful. Plus some related cleanups.
Best reviewed one commit at a time.
r? `@davidtwco`
The compiler currently has `-Ztime` and `-Ztime-passes`. I've used
`-Ztime-passes` for years but only recently learned about `-Ztime`.
What's the difference? Let's look at the `-Zhelp` output:
```
-Z time=val -- measure time of rustc processes (default: no)
-Z time-passes=val -- measure time of each rustc pass (default: no)
```
The `-Ztime-passes` description is clear, but the `-Ztime` one is less so.
Sounds like it measures the time for the entire process?
No. The real difference is that `-Ztime-passes` prints out info about passes,
and `-Ztime` does the same, but only for a subset of those passes. More
specifically, there is a distinction in the profiling code between a "verbose
generic activity" and an "extra verbose generic activity". `-Ztime-passes`
prints both kinds, while `-Ztime` only prints the first one. (It took me
a close reading of the source code to determine this difference.)
In practice this distinction has low value. Perhaps in the past the "extra
verbose" output was more voluminous, but now that we only print stats for a
pass if it exceeds 5ms or alters the RSS, `-Ztime-passes` is less spammy. Also,
a lot of the "extra verbose" cases are for individual lint passes, and you need
to also use `-Zno-interleave-lints` to see those anyway.
Therefore, this commit removes `-Ztime` and the associated machinery. One thing
to note is that the existing "extra verbose" activities all have an extra
string argument, so the commit adds the ability to accept an extra argument to
the "verbose" activities.
Sometimes it can happen that invalid code like a TyKind::Error makes
its way through the compiler without triggering any errors (this is
always a bug in rustc but bugs do happen sometimes :)). These ICEs
will manifest in the backend like as cg_llvm not being able to get
the layout of `[type error]`, which makes it hard to debug. By flushing
before codegen, we display all the delayed bugs, making it easier to
trace it to the root of the problem.
Remove support for legacy PM
This removes support for optimizing with LLVM's legacy pass manager, as well as the unstable `-Znew-llvm-pass-manager` option. We have been defaulting to the new PM since LLVM 13 (except for s390x that waited for 14), and LLVM 15 removed support altogether. The only place we still use the legacy PM is for writing the output file, just like `llc` does.
cc #74705
r? ``@nikic``
KaDiWa