Lint cleanups by nnethercote · Pull Request #157689 · rust-lang/rust

nnethercote · 2026-06-10T02:20:06Z

This PR is a precursor to #157762, which does some invasive changes to speed up clippy. This PR has various clean up commits I made in preparation for the invasive changes. Details in individual commits.

r? @GuillaumeGomez

nnethercote · 2026-06-10T02:20:16Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

Lint cleanups

rust-bors · 2026-06-10T04:30:10Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 823510d (823510d73548f1ca5796a6ff7c04871b48c2ee61, parent: d56483a91d6cf5041351a3208b8d08f98f0c8b56)

rust-timer · 2026-06-10T05:10:54Z

Finished benchmarking commit (823510d): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read:

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.

Next, please: If you can, justify the regressions found in this try perf run in writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, fix the regressions and do another perf run. Neutral or positive results will clear the label automatically.

@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)	0.3%	[0.1%, 1.0%]	30
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.7%	[0.1%, 1.9%]	57
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.3%	[0.1%, 1.0%]	30

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

Results (secondary 2.7%)

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)	2.7%	[2.2%, 3.6%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 525.47s -> 516.715s (-1.67%)
Artifact size: 400.80 MiB -> 401.32 MiB (0.13%)

These structs can own the `Vec`.

By using `retain` instead of `into_iter`/`filter`/`collect`.

It doesn't define any `check_*` methods so there's no point adding it to the passes list. (It's only there for `HardwiredLints::lint_vec`.) This makes it more like `SoftLints`.

All the other paired methods in this trait have the form `check_foo`/`check_foo_post`.

Currently the use points need to handle method attributes, due to a single low-value doc comment in each macro's body. This commit moves those doc comments so the use points can be simplified. The comments are also made more accurate -- there are now multiple `_post` methods and the comments now cover all of them, not just one of them.

That reflects how they're mostly used and avoids the need for some long signatures. And it matches `{Early,Late}LintPassObject` nicely. Also make them public so that clippy can use them.

There's a lot of repetition here that can be avoided.

nnethercote · 2026-06-12T09:59:00Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

Lint cleanups

rustbot · 2026-06-12T10:12:37Z

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

cc @rust-lang/clippy

samueltardieu · 2026-06-12T10:46:26Z

@nnethercote Those changes will conflict on the Clippy side with the ones being currently merged: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/157779/changes#diff-87bfc7a19a52188bf03cd0c38999b9a1adf259e1631f5c493cd30704340dd602

Also, clippy_dev/src/new_lint.rs should probably be modified as well as it auto-generates the initialization line for added lints, which should probably now use b!() or similar.

rust-bors · 2026-06-12T12:08:16Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: f45cfe7 (f45cfe742c19a6dfd7dd26799f4fa71dbbe9998f, parent: 09a371361240e42b0d69438fd1179efcf212e576)

rust-timer · 2026-06-12T12:48:28Z

Finished benchmarking commit (f45cfe7): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. Consider adding rollup=never if this change is not fit for rolling up.

@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
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

Results (secondary -3.1%)

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)	-3.1%	[-3.6%, -2.8%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 517.481s -> 517.406s (-0.01%)
Artifact size: 401.31 MiB -> 400.78 MiB (-0.13%)

ada4a · 2026-06-12T13:48:53Z

+    macro_rules! early {
+        ($register:ident, $lint:ident) => {
+            store.register_lints(&$lint::lint_vec());
+            store.$register(Box::new(|| Box::new($lint)));
+        };
+    }
+
+    macro_rules! late {
+        ($register:ident, $lint:ident) => {
+            store.register_lints(&$lint::lint_vec());
+            store.$register(Box::new(|_| Box::new($lint)));
+        };
+    }
+
+    early!(register_early_pass, LintPassImpl);
+    early!(register_early_pass, ImplicitSysrootCrateImport);
+    early!(register_early_pass, BadUseOfFindAttr);
+
+    late!(register_late_mod_pass, DefaultHashTypes);
+    late!(register_late_mod_pass, QueryStability);
+    late!(register_late_mod_pass, TyTyKind);
+    late!(register_late_mod_pass, TypeIr);
+    late!(register_late_mod_pass, BadOptAccess);
+    late!(register_late_mod_pass, DisallowedPassByRef);
+    late!(register_late_mod_pass, SpanUseEqCtxt);
+    late!(register_late_mod_pass, SymbolInternStringLiteral);
+
+    late!(register_late_pass, RustcMustMatchExhaustively);


Since the bodies of the two macros ended up being identical, and the early/late distinction is already clear from the method name used (register_early_pass vs register_late(_mod)pass), maybe use one macro instead, called something like register!?

Suggested change

macro_rules! early {

($register:ident, $lint:ident) => {

store.register_lints(&$lint::lint_vec());

store.$register(Box::new(|| Box::new($lint)));

};

}

macro_rules! late {

($register:ident, $lint:ident) => {

store.register_lints(&$lint::lint_vec());

store.$register(Box::new(|_| Box::new($lint)));

};

}

early!(register_early_pass, LintPassImpl);

early!(register_early_pass, ImplicitSysrootCrateImport);

early!(register_early_pass, BadUseOfFindAttr);

late!(register_late_mod_pass, DefaultHashTypes);

late!(register_late_mod_pass, QueryStability);

late!(register_late_mod_pass, TyTyKind);

late!(register_late_mod_pass, TypeIr);

late!(register_late_mod_pass, BadOptAccess);

late!(register_late_mod_pass, DisallowedPassByRef);

late!(register_late_mod_pass, SpanUseEqCtxt);

late!(register_late_mod_pass, SymbolInternStringLiteral);

late!(register_late_pass, RustcMustMatchExhaustively);

macro_rules! register {

($register:ident, $lint:ident) => {

store.register_lints(&$lint::lint_vec());

store.$register(Box::new(|_| Box::new($lint)));

};

}

register!(register_early_pass, LintPassImpl);

register!(register_early_pass, ImplicitSysrootCrateImport);

register!(register_early_pass, BadUseOfFindAttr);

register!(register_late_mod_pass, DefaultHashTypes);

register!(register_late_mod_pass, QueryStability);

register!(register_late_mod_pass, TyTyKind);

register!(register_late_mod_pass, TypeIr);

register!(register_late_mod_pass, BadOptAccess);

register!(register_late_mod_pass, DisallowedPassByRef);

register!(register_late_mod_pass, SpanUseEqCtxt);

register!(register_late_mod_pass, SymbolInternStringLiteral);

register!(register_late_pass, RustcMustMatchExhaustively);

View changes since the review

rust-bors · 2026-06-12T16:04:21Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #157779) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

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 10, 2026

rust-bors Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 10, 2026

Auto merge of #157689 - nnethercote:lint-cleanups, r=<try>

823510d

Lint cleanups

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 Jun 10, 2026

nnethercote added 9 commits June 12, 2026 19:46

Remove lifetime from RuntimeCombined{Early,Late}LintPass

5679a06

These structs can own the `Vec`.

Filter lint passes in place

4efbb2b

By using `retain` instead of `into_iter`/`filter`/`collect`.

Remove an unnecessary 'static bound

08cd7ba

Don't put HardwiredLints in lint passes

68106a8

It doesn't define any `check_*` methods so there's no point adding it to the passes list. (It's only there for `HardwiredLints::lint_vec`.) This makes it more like `SoftLints`.

Factor out repetitive code in register_internal

5f02996

Rename {enter,exit}_where_predicate

7618876

All the other paired methods in this trait have the form `check_foo`/`check_foo_post`.

Put a box within {Early,Late}LintPassFactory.

9e8ec30

That reflects how they're mostly used and avoids the need for some long signatures. And it matches `{Early,Late}LintPassObject` nicely. Also make them public so that clippy can use them.

Streamline clippy's early/late lint list construction

fe67847

There's a lot of repetition here that can be avoided.

nnethercote force-pushed the lint-cleanups branch from c0abbd2 to fe67847 Compare June 12, 2026 09:57

rustbot added the T-clippy Relevant to the Clippy team. label Jun 12, 2026

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 12, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 12, 2026

Auto merge of #157689 - nnethercote:lint-cleanups, r=<try>

f45cfe7

Lint cleanups

rustbot assigned GuillaumeGomez Jun 12, 2026

nnethercote marked this pull request as ready for review June 12, 2026 10:12

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jun 12, 2026

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Jun 12, 2026

nnethercote mentioned this pull request Jun 12, 2026

Speed up clippy by not calling empty check_foo methods. #157762

Draft

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. perf-regression Performance regression. labels Jun 12, 2026

ada4a reviewed Jun 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Conversation

nnethercote commented Jun 10, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented Jun 10, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors Bot commented Jun 10, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Jun 10, 2026

Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read:

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented Jun 12, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

rustbot commented Jun 12, 2026

Uh oh!

samueltardieu commented Jun 12, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Jun 12, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Jun 12, 2026

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Uh oh!

ada4a Jun 12, 2026 • 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!

rust-bors Bot commented Jun 12, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

nnethercote commented Jun 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

ada4a Jun 12, 2026 •

edited by rustbot

Loading