Rework lint pass running by nnethercote · Pull Request #158239 · rust-lang/rust

nnethercote · 2026-06-22T06:23:42Z

Some cleanups relating to the running of lint passes.

It's a bad name: long, and contains a negative. `skippable_lints` is better.

In particular, `late_lint_mod` doesn't filter consistently: it only checks if `builtin_lints` needs running in the `passes.is_empty()` case, and it doesn't check if the other passes need running at all.

It's called in two cases: pre-expansion lists, and early lints. The appropriate builtin pass is specified at the call site but the appropriate other passes are chosen within, which is inconsistent. This commit changes it so everything is chosen within, based on the boolean `pre_expansion_lint` parameter. `check_ast_node_inner` is split into `run_passes` and `run_pass`; the extra function is needed because the genericness of `builtin_lints` is pushed down one level below `check_ast_node`.

rustbot · 2026-06-22T06:23:45Z

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

clippy is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/rust-clippy instead.

cc @rust-lang/clippy

Urgau · 2026-06-22T07:35:27Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

Rework lint pass running

rust-bors · 2026-06-22T09:48:17Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 9309619 (9309619fbed6f684597cb21e4d42b3451eadf882)
Base parent: 942ac9c (942ac9ce4116d4ea784c9882659372b34978b1f8)

rust-timer · 2026-06-22T10:29:15Z

Finished benchmarking commit (9309619): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. It's automatically marked not fit for rolling up. Overriding is possible but disadvised: it risks changing compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -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
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.9%, -0.1%]	23
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.5%	[-1.0%, -0.2%]	34
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.9%, -0.1%]	23

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary -3.8%)

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)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.8%	[-4.3%, -3.4%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results (primary -3.0%)

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)	-3.0%	[-3.0%, -3.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-3.0%	[-3.0%, -3.0%]	1

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 512.761s -> 504.991s (-1.52%)
Artifact size: 353.08 MiB -> 353.62 MiB (0.15%)

nnethercote · 2026-06-22T22:12:41Z

I have added a new commit renaming pass_must_run as is_lint_pass_required.

Urgau

Looks good to me.

View changes since this review

Urgau · 2026-06-23T05:32:02Z

@bors r+

rust-bors · 2026-06-23T05:32:04Z

📌 Commit 2724e23 has been approved by Urgau

It is now in the queue for this repository.

jhpratt · 2026-06-23T05:41:58Z

@bors p=6

threading between rollups

@Urgau

Rework lint pass running Some cleanups relating to the running of lint passes. r? @Urgau

rust-bors · 2026-06-25T08:09:49Z

💔 Test for e9e59c9 failed: CI. Failed job:

auto - x86_64-gnu-tools (web logs, enhanced plaintext logs)

JonathanBrouwer · 2026-06-25T08:12:03Z

@bors retry

@Urgau

Rework lint pass running Some cleanups relating to the running of lint passes. r? @Urgau

rust-log-analyzer · 2026-06-25T08:19:38Z

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)

  TOOLSTATE_PUBLISH: 1
  IMAGE: x86_64-gnu-tools
##[endgroup]
    Updating crates.io index
error: failed to get `num-conv` as a dependency of package `time v0.3.38`
    ... which satisfies dependency `time = "^0.3.16"` of package `cookie_store v0.21.1`
    ... which satisfies dependency `cookie_store = "^0.21.1"` of package `ureq v3.0.8`
    ... which satisfies dependency `ureq = "^3"` of package `citool v0.1.0 (/home/runner/work/rust/rust/src/ci/citool)`

Caused by:
  failed to load source for dependency `num-conv`

Caused by:
  unable to update registry `crates-io`

Caused by:
  download of nu/m-/num-conv failed

Caused by:
  curl failed

Caused by:

rust-bors · 2026-06-25T08:19:48Z

💔 Test for d9b9b74 failed: CI. Failed job:

auto - dist-x86_64-msvc (web logs, enhanced plaintext logs)

JonathanBrouwer · 2026-06-25T08:20:43Z

@bors retry

rust-log-analyzer · 2026-06-25T08:49:39Z

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)

  WIX: /c/a/rust/rust/wix
##[endgroup]
    Updating crates.io index
error: failed to get `adler2` as a dependency of package `miniz_oxide v0.8.8`
    ... which satisfies dependency `miniz_oxide = "^0.8.5"` of package `flate2 v1.1.9`
    ... which satisfies dependency `flate2 = "^1.1.9"` of package `citool v0.1.0 (C:\a\rust\rust\src\ci\citool)`

Caused by:
  failed to load source for dependency `adler2`

Caused by:
  unable to update registry `crates-io`

Caused by:
  download of ad/le/adler2 failed

Caused by:
  curl failed

Caused by:

rust-bors · 2026-06-25T11:50:33Z

☀️ Test successful - CI
Approved by: Urgau
Duration: 3h 27m 31s
Pushing 973ad0d to main...

github-actions · 2026-06-25T11:54:02Z

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 73100ee (parent) -> 973ad0d (this PR)

Test differences

Show 14 test diffs

14 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 973ad0d0ab149bde2e96422833c1265c7a5be217 --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

x86_64-gnu-tools: 40m 44s -> 1h 1m (+50.7%)
dist-x86_64-illumos: 1h 48m -> 1h 10m (-34.7%)
x86_64-gnu-stable: 1h 52m -> 2h 30m (+33.7%)
dist-x86_64-msvc-alt: 2h 2m -> 2h 43m (+33.5%)
dist-x86_64-apple: 1h 33m -> 1h 59m (+28.1%)
dist-i586-gnu-i586-i686-musl: 1h 15m -> 1h 33m (+24.2%)
aarch64-apple-macos-26: 2h 44m -> 3h 20m (+21.8%)
dist-ohos-x86_64: 1h 17m -> 1h 2m (-19.3%)
pr-check-1: 26m 59s -> 31m 50s (+17.9%)
x86_64-gnu-gcc: 1h 5m -> 56m 13s (-14.6%)

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.

nnethercote · 2026-06-25T12:05:06Z

Ninth time's the charm!

JonathanBrouwer · 2026-06-25T12:21:52Z

(It works now because we merged a workaround disabling part of CI #158379)

rust-timer · 2026-06-25T19:35:01Z

Finished benchmarking commit (973ad0d): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - 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
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.9%, -0.1%]	16
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.5%	[-1.0%, -0.2%]	30
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.9%, -0.1%]	16

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.0%, secondary 2.0%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[1.0%, 2.6%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1

Cycles

Results (primary -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)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 505.309s -> 509.16s (0.76%)
Artifact size: 353.63 MiB -> 353.81 MiB (0.05%)

nnethercote added 5 commits June 22, 2026 16:03

Remove unnecessary parens

5ecda6e

Factor out repeated "run pass?" code

f5cba18

Rename lints_that_dont_need_to_run

b06c311

It's a bad name: long, and contains a negative. `skippable_lints` is better.

Make late_lint_mod/late_lint_crate more similar

8f412c4

In particular, `late_lint_mod` doesn't filter consistently: it only checks if `builtin_lints` needs running in the `passes.is_empty()` case, and it doesn't check if the other passes need running at all.

rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-clippy Relevant to the Clippy team. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jun 22, 2026

rustbot assigned Urgau Jun 22, 2026

Urgau reviewed Jun 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread compiler/rustc_lint/src/lib.rs Outdated

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jun 22, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 22, 2026

Auto merge of #158239 - nnethercote:rework-lint-pass-running, r=<try>

9309619

Rework lint pass running

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jun 22, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Rename pass_must_run as is_lint_pass_required

2724e23

nnethercote force-pushed the rework-lint-pass-running branch from 09591e3 to 2724e23 Compare June 23, 2026 00:40

Urgau approved these changes Jun 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

rust-bors Bot 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 Jun 23, 2026

rust-bors Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 25, 2026

Auto merge of #158239 - nnethercote:rework-lint-pass-running, r=Urgau

e9e59c9

Rework lint pass running Some cleanups relating to the running of lint passes. r? @Urgau

rust-bors Bot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jun 25, 2026

rust-bors Bot 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 Jun 25, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 25, 2026

Auto merge of #158239 - nnethercote:rework-lint-pass-running, r=Urgau

d9b9b74

Rework lint pass running Some cleanups relating to the running of lint passes. r? @Urgau

rust-bors Bot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jun 25, 2026

rust-bors Bot 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 Jun 25, 2026

rust-bors Bot mentioned this pull request Jun 25, 2026

Rollup of 17 pull requests #158391

Closed

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors Bot added merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jun 25, 2026

rust-bors Bot merged commit 973ad0d into rust-lang:main Jun 25, 2026
14 of 15 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.98.0 milestone Jun 25, 2026

rust-bors Bot mentioned this pull request Jun 25, 2026

Eagerly fetch typeck results when linting #157928

Open

nnethercote deleted the rework-lint-pass-running branch June 26, 2026 07:00

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

nnethercote commented Jun 22, 2026 • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Urgau commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors Bot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Jun 22, 2026

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

Urgau left a comment • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Urgau commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

jhpratt commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

JonathanBrouwer commented Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-log-analyzer commented Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

JonathanBrouwer commented Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-log-analyzer commented Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 25, 2026

Test differences

Job duration changes

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

JonathanBrouwer commented Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Jun 25, 2026

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

nnethercote commented Jun 22, 2026 •

edited by rustbot

Loading

Urgau left a comment •

edited by rustbot

Loading