Skip to content

test(crash): reproduce the symptoms of toolchain corruption with checkpoints - #5194

Draft
rami3l wants to merge 1 commit into
rust-lang:mainfrom
rami3l:test/concurrent-toolchain-modification
Draft

rami3l wants to merge 1 commit into
rust-lang:mainfrom
rami3l:test/concurrent-toolchain-modification

Conversation

@rami3l

@rami3l rami3l commented Nov 5, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Part of rust-lang/goals#736.

Related to #3937.

This is the first part of the real "Process Safety/Atomic Transaction" patch, in that it demonstrates where the problems really are when this feature is NOT landed.

It provides a reasonable explanation for recurring issues around #988 in its many incarnations:

Many thanks to @cachebag's testing framework, without which this would have been much more difficult.

This patch is currently in "draft" state since I am not sure if merging these tests as-is would bring any value. But in any case, the assertions in each of the tests should be flipped at the end of the feature patch.

Assisted by GitHub Copilot on Sonnet 5.5.

Comment thread tests/suite/cli_crash.rs Resolved
Comment thread tests/suite/cli_crash.rs Resolved
@rami3l
rami3l force-pushed the test/concurrent-toolchain-modification branch 8 times, most recently from 8d07bca to f5f28ec Compare November 6, 2026 11:25
@rami3l
rami3l force-pushed the test/concurrent-toolchain-modification branch 2 times, most recently from 5e5ecf9 to a537b53 Compare November 9, 2026 08:45
@rami3l
rami3l force-pushed the test/concurrent-toolchain-modification branch 6 times, most recently from 7c60349 to 580907a Compare November 10, 2026 10:32
…kpoints

Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
@rami3l
rami3l force-pushed the test/concurrent-toolchain-modification branch from 580907a to 22f0e4d Compare November 10, 2026 10:36

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants