Port the `without_debuginfo` test from `backtrace-rs` to the testsuite by JayanAXHF · Pull Request #152860 · rust-lang/rust

JayanAXHF · 2026-02-19T18:11:13Z

Ports over the without_debuginfo from backtrace-rs to the testsuite.
Caveat: I had to create a nightly feature backtrace_internals_accessors to access the internals of std::backtrace::Backtrace and std::backtrace::BacktraceFrames. It is not on the stabilisation track, since it doesn't have an ACP.

r? @workingjubilee

rustbot · 2026-02-19T18:11:18Z

workingjubilee is currently at their maximum review capacity.
They may take a while to respond.

rustbot · 2026-02-19T18:58:53Z

Some changes occurred in src/tools/cargo

cc @ehuss

JayanAXHF · 2026-02-19T20:10:05Z

@workingjubilee This CI failure seems unrelated to the test? Is this a known issue/regression?

workingjubilee · 2026-02-19T21:47:41Z

that's weird.

workingjubilee · 2026-02-19T21:52:10Z

+fn main() {
+    let mut missing_symbols = 0;
+    let mut has_symbols = 0;
+    let btrace = backtrace::Backtrace::force_capture();
+    let frames = btrace.frames();
+    for frame in frames {
+        let mut any = false;
+        for sym in frame.symbols() {
+            if sym.name().is_some() {
+                any = true;
+                break;
+            }
+        }
+        if any {
+            has_symbols += 1;
+        } else if !frame.ip().is_null() {
+            missing_symbols += 1;
+        }
+    }
+
+    // FIXME(#346) currently on MinGW we can't symbolize kernel32.dll and other
+    // system libraries, which means we miss the last few symbols.
+    if cfg!(windows) && cfg!(target_env = "gnu") {
+        assert!(missing_symbols < has_symbols && has_symbols > 4);
+    } else {
+        assert_eq!(missing_symbols, 0);
+    }


This isn't a known problem, so we may need to determine how many frames are missing symbols and it may be aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu specific.

Well it doesn't occur on my arm m2 mac so maybe it's specific? Might wanna check windows too to determine if it's x86

Oops I misread the target. Do you mind if I rerun the CI for x86 Linux to try to repro the problem?

@workingjubilee I added some debug info to try to find the frame with the missing info. Also could #152870 be relevant to this?

It's unclear in the current state to which "known problem" this discussion is referring to. Is it about __libc_start_main one?

I don't see how #152870 would be relevant in that context.

JayanAXHF · 2026-02-20T11:10:13Z

--- stderr -------------------------------
missing symbol for frame 6: []
Full erroneous backtrace: Backtrace [
    { fn: "<std::backtrace::Backtrace>::create" },
    { fn: "all_frames_have_symbols::main" },
    { fn: "std::sys::backtrace::__rust_begin_short_backtrace::<fn(), ()>" },
    { fn: "std::rt::lang_start::<()>::{closure#0}" },
    { fn: "std::rt::lang_start_internal" },
    { fn: "main" },
    { fn: "__libc_start_main" },
    { fn: "_start" },
]
thread 'main' (117654) panicked at /checkout/tests/ui/no_debuginfo/all_frames_have_symbols.rs:37:9:
assertion `left == right` failed
  left: 1
 right: 0
stack backtrace:
   0: __rustc::rust_begin_unwind
   1: core::panicking::panic_fmt
   2: core::panicking::assert_failed_inner
   3: core::panicking::assert_failed::<i32, i32>
   4: all_frames_have_symbols::main
note: Some details are omitted, run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=full` for a verbose backtrace.
------------------------------------------

This is the relevant debug log. Apparently the __libc_start_main doesn't have a symbol

rustbot · 2026-07-03T06:00:23Z

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.

rustbot · 2026-07-03T06:00:24Z

⚠️ Warning ⚠️

Some commits in this PR modify submodules.

If this was not intentional, see I changed a submodule on accident in the rustc dev guide.

Co-authored-by: Jubilee <workingjubilee@gmail.com>

…/no_debuginfo

workingjubilee · 2026-07-03T09:03:45Z

tidy??? really???

workingjubilee · 2026-07-03T17:11:55Z

@bors r+

rust-bors · 2026-07-03T17:11:58Z

📌 Commit f1cedf9 has been approved by workingjubilee

It is now in the queue for this repository.

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

@workingjubilee

…fo, r=workingjubilee Port the `without_debuginfo` test from `backtrace-rs` to the testsuite Part of rust-lang#122899 Ports over the `without_debuginfo` from backtrace-rs to the testsuite. Caveat: I had to create a nightly feature `backtrace_internals_accessors` to access the internals of `std::backtrace::Backtrace` and `std::backtrace::BacktraceFrames`. It is not on the stabilisation track, since it doesn't have an ACP. r? @workingjubilee

Rollup of 18 pull requests Successful merges: - #158692 (Add release notes for 1.96.1) - #134021 (Implement `IntoIterator` for `[&[mut]] Box<[T; N], A>`) - #152860 (Port the `without_debuginfo` test from `backtrace-rs` to the testsuite) - #155932 (MIR Call terminator: evaluate destination place before arguments) - #156777 (Add -Zautodiff_post_passes flag to limit which llvm passes to run after enzyme to make autodiff tests more robust) - #157151 (JSON target specs: remove 'x86-softfloat' compatibility alias) - #157835 (expand free alias types in the auto-trait orphan check) - #158377 (add `-Zforce-intrinsic-fallback` flag) - #158434 (delegation: refactor AST -> HIR lowering) - #158552 (make some tidy errors around python easier to understand) - #158624 (borrowck: Introduce BlameConstraint::to_obligation_cause_from_path()) - #158704 (Optimize `ArrayChunks::try_rfold` with `DoubleEndedIterator::next_chunk_back`) - #158711 (library: Comment on libtest's dicey internal soundness) - #158539 (Move `SizeHint` and `IoHandle` to `core::io`) - #158659 (refactor the normalization in `coerce_shared_info`) - #158689 (resolver: don't use `Finalize` when resolving visibilities during AST expansion) - #158698 (Update TypeVisitable implementation) - #158706 (Tweaks to MIR building scope API)

JonathanBrouwer · 2026-07-05T07:27:28Z

💔 I suspect this PR failed tests as part of a rollup
@bors r-

After fixing the problem, consider running a try job for the failed job before re-approving.

Link to failure: #158753 (comment)

rust-bors · 2026-07-05T07:27:35Z

This pull request was unapproved.

This PR was contained in a rollup (#158753), which was unapproved.

View changes since this unapproval

JayanAXHF · 2026-07-05T08:41:20Z

@workingjubilee can you squash the changes with bors?

JayanAXHF · 2026-07-05T08:42:42Z

@JonathanBrouwer we might've found another target where the missing symbol thing happens

JayanAXHF added A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc C-enhancement Category: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one. A-backtrace Area: Backtraces labels Feb 19, 2026

rustbot assigned workingjubilee Feb 19, 2026

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Feb 19, 2026

rustbot added T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Feb 19, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added has-merge-commits PR has merge commits, merge with caution. S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Feb 19, 2026

JayanAXHF force-pushed the tests/porting-no-debuginfo branch from 6f4d672 to a7b8152 Compare February 19, 2026 18:58

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. has-merge-commits PR has merge commits, merge with caution. labels Feb 19, 2026

JayanAXHF force-pushed the tests/porting-no-debuginfo branch 2 times, most recently from e93dd0f to 2ee2332 Compare February 19, 2026 19:12

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

workingjubilee reviewed Feb 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

JayanAXHF force-pushed the tests/porting-no-debuginfo branch from 2f11378 to f245f10 Compare February 20, 2026 10:26

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

JayanAXHF force-pushed the tests/porting-no-debuginfo branch from 60edd1c to a54b642 Compare February 24, 2026 11:15

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

JayanAXHF added 2 commits July 3, 2026 11:29

feat: add a nightly feature for Backtrace Frame access

7a498e6

test: port no_debuginfo to the testsuite

10f38ec

JayanAXHF force-pushed the tests/porting-no-debuginfo branch from 2379773 to 9a54d99 Compare July 3, 2026 06:00

JayanAXHF and others added 5 commits July 3, 2026 11:32

chore: update tests/ui/README.md

a970b2f

test: add debug info for the test to find the missing symbols

ee1fdcc

fixup chore: revert formatting changes

29ed3cc

fix: add exception for aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

739932f

fix: add link to PR in tests/ui/no_debuginfo/all_frames_have_symbols.rs

0e93d64

Co-authored-by: Jubilee <workingjubilee@gmail.com>

JayanAXHF force-pushed the tests/porting-no-debuginfo branch from 9a54d99 to 0e93d64 Compare July 3, 2026 06:02

refactor: move tests from tests/ui/no_debuginfo to tests/ui/backtrace…

91e2dd8

…/no_debuginfo

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

fix: made tidy happy

f1cedf9

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 Jul 3, 2026

jhpratt mentioned this pull request Jul 3, 2026

Rollup of 18 pull requests #158753

Closed

rust-bors Bot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jul 5, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

JayanAXHF commented Feb 19, 2026 • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

rustbot commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

JayanAXHF commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

workingjubilee commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

workingjubilee Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JayanAXHF Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

workingjubilee Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JayanAXHF Feb 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JayanAXHF Feb 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mati865 Apr 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

JayanAXHF commented Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

rustbot commented Jul 3, 2026

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Jul 3, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

workingjubilee commented Jul 3, 2026

Uh oh!

workingjubilee commented Jul 3, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Jul 3, 2026

Uh oh!

JonathanBrouwer commented Jul 5, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Jul 5, 2026

Uh oh!

JayanAXHF commented Jul 5, 2026

Uh oh!

JayanAXHF commented Jul 5, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

JayanAXHF commented Feb 19, 2026 •

edited by rustbot

Loading