compiletest: Remove rfail support from incremental tests#154751
Merged
rust-bors[bot] merged 1 commit intorust-lang:mainfrom Apr 7, 2026
Merged
compiletest: Remove rfail support from incremental tests#154751rust-bors[bot] merged 1 commit intorust-lang:mainfrom
rfail support from incremental tests#154751rust-bors[bot] merged 1 commit intorust-lang:mainfrom
Conversation
Collaborator
|
Some changes occurred in src/tools/compiletest cc @jieyouxu The rustc-dev-guide subtree was changed. If this PR only touches the dev guide consider submitting a PR directly to rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide otherwise thank you for updating the dev guide with your changes. |
rustbot
added
A-compiletest
Collaborator
|
r? @wesleywiser rustbot has assigned @wesleywiser. Use Why was this reviewer chosen?The reviewer was selected based on:
|
Member
Author
|
After some more experimentation, I found that reverting the compiler changes in #83220 on current main does not cause That makes me suspect that the regression test is currently not providing any value at all, and that we would be better off just deleting it. |
Member
Author
|
I have pushed an update that simply deletes |
Incremental revisions beginning with `rfail` would cause the incremental test runner to build the test program, expecting success, and then run the test program, expecting failure. Expecting incremental tests to fail at runtime is of questionable utility, because in almost all cases an equivalent test program can be made to succeed at runtime instead. Removing `rfail` support is a small step towards cleaning up compiletest's incremental test runner, and its overall handling of pass/fail expectations. There was one existing regression test using `rfail` revisions: `tests/incremental/issue-80691-bad-eval-cache.rs`. The test code is complex, and reverting the fix in RUST-83220 does not actually cause the test to fail, suggesting that it is no longer a useful regression test. This commit therefore deletes that test.
Collaborator
|
This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed. Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers. |
wesleywiser
approved these changes
Apr 6, 2026
Member
|
@bors r+ rollup |
Contributor
rust-bors
bot
added
S-waiting-on-bors
rust-bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 7, 2026
Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - #154627 (Move `rustc_middle::mir::mono` to `rustc_middle::mono`) - #154729 (de-non_const some `Iterator` methods) - #154891 (implement `StructuralPartialEq` for `MaybeDangling`) - #154894 (Slightly refactor mplace<->ptr conversions) - #154751 (compiletest: Remove `rfail` support from incremental tests) - #154901 (Update books)
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 7, 2026
Rollup merge of #154751 - Zalathar:rfail, r=wesleywiser compiletest: Remove `rfail` support from incremental tests Incremental revisions beginning with `rfail` would cause the incremental test runner to build the test program, expecting success, and then run the test program, expecting failure. Expecting incremental tests to fail at runtime is of questionable utility, because in almost all cases an equivalent test program can be made to succeed at runtime instead. Removing `rfail` support is a small step towards cleaning up compiletest's incremental test runner, and its overall handling of pass/fail expectations. There was one existing regression test using `rfail` revisions: `tests/incremental/issue-80691-bad-eval-cache.rs`. The test code is complex, and reverting the fix in #83220 does not actually cause the test to fail, suggesting that it is no longer a useful regression test. This PR therefore deletes that test. (An earlier draft of this PR ported the test to run-make, but now it has been removed entirely.)
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
to rust-lang/miri
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 8, 2026
Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang/rust#154627 (Move `rustc_middle::mir::mono` to `rustc_middle::mono`) - rust-lang/rust#154729 (de-non_const some `Iterator` methods) - rust-lang/rust#154891 (implement `StructuralPartialEq` for `MaybeDangling`) - rust-lang/rust#154894 (Slightly refactor mplace<->ptr conversions) - rust-lang/rust#154751 (compiletest: Remove `rfail` support from incremental tests) - rust-lang/rust#154901 (Update books)
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
to rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 8, 2026
Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang/rust#154627 (Move `rustc_middle::mir::mono` to `rustc_middle::mono`) - rust-lang/rust#154729 (de-non_const some `Iterator` methods) - rust-lang/rust#154891 (implement `StructuralPartialEq` for `MaybeDangling`) - rust-lang/rust#154894 (Slightly refactor mplace<->ptr conversions) - rust-lang/rust#154751 (compiletest: Remove `rfail` support from incremental tests) - rust-lang/rust#154901 (Update books)
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Incremental revisions beginning with
rfailwould cause the incremental test runner to build the test program, expecting success, and then run the test program, expecting failure.Expecting incremental tests to fail at runtime is of questionable utility, because in almost all cases an equivalent test program can be made to succeed at runtime instead.
Removing
rfailsupport is a small step towards cleaning up compiletest's incremental test runner, and its overall handling of pass/fail expectations.There was one existing regression test using
rfailrevisions:tests/incremental/issue-80691-bad-eval-cache.rs. The test code is complex, and reverting the fix in #83220 does not actually cause the test to fail, suggesting that it is no longer a useful regression test. This PR therefore deletes that test.(An earlier draft of this PR ported the test to run-make, but now it has been removed entirely.)