add FCW to invalid `#[should_panic]` and `#[ignore]` #150416

Bryntet · 2025-12-27T00:29:42Z

this fixes #143799

rustbot · 2025-12-27T00:29:46Z

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_passes/src/check_attr.rs

rustbot · 2025-12-27T00:29:48Z

rustbot has assigned @jackh726.
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

Bryntet · 2025-12-27T00:29:59Z

r? @JonathanBrouwer

JonathanBrouwer · 2025-12-27T06:31:29Z

@rustbot author
This approach may not work because the test attribute has already expanded at this stage

rustbot · 2025-12-27T06:31:34Z

Reminder, once the PR becomes ready for a review, use @rustbot ready.

rustbot · 2025-12-31T15:53:09Z

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_hir/src/attrs

cc @jdonszelmann

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_attr_parsing

cc @jdonszelmann

JonathanBrouwer · 2026-01-01T13:57:23Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

add FCW to `#[should_panic]` on fn without `#[test]` attribute

compiler/rustc_attr_parsing/src/attributes/codegen_attrs.rs

compiler/rustc_attr_parsing/src/attributes/rustc_internal.rs

compiler/rustc_builtin_macros/src/test.rs

JonathanBrouwer · 2026-01-01T14:04:47Z

compiler/rustc_passes/src/errors.rs

+    #[primary_span]
+    pub attr_span: Span,
+    #[warning]
+    pub warning: bool,


Is there a reason #[warning] is configurable here?
I think this can just always be a warning

(you can do this by applying #[warning] to the struct)

this is what all the other FCW in rustc_passes/messages.ftl do AFAICT

compiler/rustc_passes/src/errors.rs

rust-bors · 2026-01-01T16:24:36Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: bcd914a (bcd914a802a15c7ff31dde1b27ac69f61014233e, parent: b49c7d784e96216e1cb709824629f5d53bc73201)

rust-timer · 2026-01-01T17:05:36Z

Finished benchmarking commit (bcd914a): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If its results are neutral or positive, the label will be automatically removed.

@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)	0.3%	[0.1%, 0.5%]	8
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.0%	[-0.0%, -0.0%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.9%, 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)	3.8%	[3.8%, 3.8%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.9%	[-1.9%, -1.9%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.9%	[-1.9%, -1.9%]	1

Cycles

Results (primary -8.5%, secondary -15.1%)

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)	5.8%	[5.8%, 5.8%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-8.5%	[-13.0%, -2.6%]	10
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-17.0%	[-27.5%, -3.0%]	11
All ❌✅ (primary)	-8.5%	[-13.0%, -2.6%]	10

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 476.873s -> 475.466s (-0.30%)
Artifact size: 390.81 MiB -> 390.85 MiB (0.01%)

…h]` fn

rustbot · 2026-01-08T13:09:11Z

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.

JonathanBrouwer · 2026-01-08T13:38:24Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

add FCW to invalid `#[should_panic]` and `#[ignore]`

rust-bors · 2026-01-08T16:00:24Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: cb3537c (cb3537c51779b496b81be46d14459b1e56e59c21, parent: bca37a20bd376ce3fd138e7cdee7fe704e0f8814)

rust-timer · 2026-01-08T16:42:04Z

Finished benchmarking commit (cb3537c): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

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

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)	1.9%	[1.3%, 2.8%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.4%	[-5.1%, -0.9%]	6
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.9%	[1.3%, 2.8%]	3

Cycles

Results (secondary -2.1%)

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)	-2.1%	[-2.1%, -2.1%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 475.924s -> 474.267s (-0.35%)
Artifact size: 390.87 MiB -> 390.86 MiB (-0.00%)

JonathanBrouwer · 2026-01-08T18:44:17Z

...mir-opt/pre-codegen/drop_boxed_slice.generic_in_place.PreCodegen.after.64bit.panic-abort.mir

                        }
                    }
                    scope 18 (inlined <std::alloc::Global as Allocator>::deallocate) {
-                        let mut _9: *mut u8;


Why did these mir-opt tests change?

rustbot added A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Dec 27, 2025

rustbot assigned jackh726 Dec 27, 2025

rustbot assigned JonathanBrouwer and unassigned jackh726 Dec 27, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Dec 27, 2025

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Dec 27, 2025

Bryntet force-pushed the fix_dangling_should_panic branch from 77c382f to 67ad2c3 Compare December 31, 2025 15:53

Bryntet force-pushed the fix_dangling_should_panic branch from 67ad2c3 to ff45852 Compare December 31, 2025 15:57

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Bryntet force-pushed the fix_dangling_should_panic branch from ff45852 to 93b3210 Compare December 31, 2025 16:06

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 1, 2026

Auto merge of #150416 - Bryntet:fix_dangling_should_panic, r=<try>

bcd914a

add FCW to `#[should_panic]` on fn without `#[test]` attribute

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 Jan 1, 2026

JonathanBrouwer requested changes Jan 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Jan 1, 2026

Bryntet force-pushed the fix_dangling_should_panic branch 2 times, most recently from ac80560 to df376a5 Compare January 6, 2026 15:41

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Bryntet force-pushed the fix_dangling_should_panic branch from df376a5 to 48614c4 Compare January 6, 2026 17:26

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Bryntet force-pushed the fix_dangling_should_panic branch from 48614c4 to 5597cc4 Compare January 6, 2026 18:16

Bryntet changed the title ~~add FCW to #[should_panic] on fn without #[test] attribute~~ add FCW to invalid #[should_panic] and #[ignore] Jan 6, 2026

add FCW to #[should_panic] when applied to non #[test] or `#[benc…

cdd7868

…h]` fn

Bryntet force-pushed the fix_dangling_should_panic branch from 5597cc4 to 0b4383b Compare January 8, 2026 13:09

add FCW to #[ignore] when applied to non #[test] or #[bench] fn

1102efa

Bryntet force-pushed the fix_dangling_should_panic branch from 0b4383b to 1102efa Compare January 8, 2026 13:12

Bryntet requested a review from JonathanBrouwer January 8, 2026 13:30

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 Jan 8, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 8, 2026

Auto merge of #150416 - Bryntet:fix_dangling_should_panic, r=<try>

cb3537c

add FCW to invalid `#[should_panic]` and `#[ignore]`

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 Jan 8, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed perf-regression Performance regression. S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Jan 8, 2026

JonathanBrouwer reviewed Jan 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

Uh oh!

add FCW to invalid #[should_panic] and #[ignore] #150416

Are you sure you want to change the base?

add FCW to invalid #[should_panic] and #[ignore] #150416

Uh oh!

Conversation

Bryntet commented Dec 27, 2025 • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Dec 27, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Dec 27, 2025

Uh oh!

Bryntet commented Dec 27, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

JonathanBrouwer commented Dec 27, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Dec 27, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Dec 31, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

JonathanBrouwer commented Jan 1, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Jan 1, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Jan 1, 2026

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

rustbot commented Jan 8, 2026

Uh oh!

JonathanBrouwer commented Jan 8, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot commented Jan 8, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Jan 8, 2026

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

add FCW to invalid `#[should_panic]` and `#[ignore]` #150416

add FCW to invalid `#[should_panic]` and `#[ignore]` #150416

Bryntet commented Dec 27, 2025 •

edited by rustbot

Loading

JonathanBrouwer commented Dec 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading