Skip to content

Conversation

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

As discussed on zulip, renaming this testsuite better reflects what they actually test. Later on, it could also allow us to add an alias to run all rustdoc tests at once.

r? @camelid

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 3, 2026

Some changes occurred in src/tools/opt-dist

cc @Kobzol

Some changes occurred in src/tools/compiletest

cc @jieyouxu

@rustbot rustbot added A-CI Area: Our Github Actions CI A-compiletest Area: The compiletest test runner A-meta Area: Issues & PRs about the rust-lang/rust repository itself A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc 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) T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc-frontend Relevant to the rustdoc-frontend team, which will review and decide on the web UI/UX output. labels Jan 3, 2026
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the A-tidy Area: The tidy tool label Jan 3, 2026
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

@fmease fmease left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you please also update the dev-guide in this PR (in a separate commit is fine) which is a subtree in this repo, namely in src/doc/rustc-dev-guide/.

E.g., renaming src/doc/rustc-dev-guide/src/rustdoc-internals/rustdoc-test-suite.md to src/doc/rustc-dev-guide/src/rustdoc-internals/rustdoc-html-test-suite.md & updating chapter name, link texts etc. Highly appreciated! :)

View changes since this review

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

Sure!

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 3, 2026

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.

cc @BoxyUwU, @jieyouxu, @Kobzol, @tshepang

@rustbot rustbot added the A-rustc-dev-guide Area: rustc-dev-guide label Jan 3, 2026
Copy link
Member

@fmease fmease left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Two more things, then r=me unless you'd like to get reviews from others, too.

View changes since this review

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 3, 2026

compiletest directives have been modified. Please add or update docs for the
new or modified directive in src/doc/rustc-dev-guide/.

Copy link
Member

@fmease fmease Jan 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As you can see from the test expectation changes, running ./x test librustdoc rustdoc no longer tests tests/rustdoc (since it no longer exists).

You should update the expression from rustdoc to rustdoc-html, rename this file and rebless the snap. Similarly for the other test file.

Copy link
Member

@fmease fmease Jan 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

(If we ever introduce rustdoc as an alias for all rustdoc-* test suites, we can change the rustdoc-html back to rustdoc in these two tests (or just keep them and add new ones))

@fmease fmease self-assigned this Jan 3, 2026
[build] rustc 0 <host> -> RustdocGUITest 1 <host>
[test] rustdoc-gui 1 <host>
[test] compiletest-incremental 1 <host>
[build] rustc 1 <host> -> rustc 2 <host>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm, I'm slightly worried about this disappearing... I don't see why that has happened (similarly for the other tests in this file). I haven't looked closely at these tests & I'm not super familar with bootstrap's innards, so I might be missing sth.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's wait for @Kobzol to have a look to ensure I didn't break something.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I suspect this is because x test rustdoc also tries to run unit tests for src/tools/rustdoc, despite that being a stub crate with no tests in it.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually, looking at the results of running x test src/tools/rustdoc on main, I have no idea what's going on. 🤷‍♂️

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, x test src/tools/rustdoc is effectively treated as an alias for x test src/librustdoc, so it's running the unit tests and doctests for src/librustdoc.

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Comment on lines 171 to 172
(x_test_librustdoc_rustdoc, "test librustdoc rustdoc"),
(x_test_rustdoc, "test rustdoc"),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IMO we should leave these two lines untouched, and instead add a new line for (x_test_rustdoc_html, "test rustdoc-html").

Copy link
Member

@Zalathar Zalathar Jan 5, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The primary purpose of these existing lines is to capture the weird aliasing behaviour of src/librustdoc and src/tools/rustdoc, so it’s expected that renaming tests/rustdoc will affect the snapshots.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure, done!

Copy link
Member

@Kobzol Kobzol left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Changes LGTM (with #150645 (comment) changed).

View changes since this review

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jan 6, 2026

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #150640) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Jan 6, 2026

☔ The latest upstream changes made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 7, 2026

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.

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

Ready to go then! Setting a priority of 1 seems it updates so many files...

Thanks for the reviews!

@bors r=Kobzol,Zalathar p=1

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jan 7, 2026

📌 Commit 8256623 has been approved by Kobzol,Zalathar

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@rust-bors rust-bors bot added the S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. label Jan 7, 2026
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jan 7, 2026

🌲 The tree is currently closed for pull requests below priority 1000. This pull request will be tested once the tree is reopened.

@rust-bors rust-bors bot removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jan 7, 2026
@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Jan 7, 2026

📌 Commit 8256623 has been approved by Kobzol,Zalathar

It is now in the queue for this repository.

🌲 The tree is currently closed for pull requests below priority 50. This pull request will be tested once the tree is reopened.

@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-bors rust-bors bot added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jan 7, 2026
@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Jan 7, 2026

☀️ Test successful - CI
Approved by: Kobzol,Zalathar
Pushing fc546b9 to main...

@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain enhanced) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
     Running `target/release/citool post-merge-report fc546b94ad5d499753c190b733128f49fb18e1d5`
error: the following required arguments were not provided:
  <CURRENT>

Usage: citool post-merge-report <PARENT> <CURRENT>

For more information, try '--help'.
##[error]Process completed with exit code 2.
Post job cleanup.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (fc546b9): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.6% [0.5%, 0.6%] 3
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.9%, secondary -2.4%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-1.9% [-1.9%, -1.9%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.4% [-2.4%, -2.4%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) -1.9% [-1.9%, -1.9%] 1

Cycles

Results (secondary 2.2%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.2% [2.2%, 2.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 474.983s -> 487.524s (2.64%)
Artifact size: 390.84 MiB -> 390.86 MiB (0.01%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

A-CI Area: Our Github Actions CI A-compiletest Area: The compiletest test runner A-meta Area: Issues & PRs about the rust-lang/rust repository itself A-rustc-dev-guide Area: rustc-dev-guide A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc A-tidy Area: The tidy tool 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) T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc-frontend Relevant to the rustdoc-frontend team, which will review and decide on the web UI/UX output.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants