coverage: Add debugging flag `-Zcoverage-options=no-mir-spans`
When set, this flag skips the code that normally extracts coverage spans from MIR statements and terminators. That sometimes makes it easier to debug branch coverage and MC/DC coverage instrumentation, because the coverage output is less noisy.
For internal debugging only. If future code changes would make it hard to keep supporting this flag, it should be removed at that time.
`@rustbot` label +A-code-coverage
Rename `InstanceDef` -> `InstanceKind`
Renames `InstanceDef` to `InstanceKind`. The `Def` here is confusing, and makes it hard to distinguish `Instance` and `InstanceDef`. `InstanceKind` makes this more obvious, since it's really just describing what *kind* of instance we have.
Not sure if this is large enough to warrant a types team MCP -- it's only 53 files. I don't personally think it does, but happy to write one if anyone disagrees. cc ``@rust-lang/types``
r? types
When set, this flag skips the code that normally extracts coverage spans from
MIR statements and terminators. That sometimes makes it easier to debug branch
coverage and MC/DC coverage, because the coverage output is less noisy.
For internal debugging only. If other code changes would make it hard to keep
supporting this flag, remove it.
coverage: Several small improvements to graph code
This PR combines a few small improvements to coverage graph handling code:
- Remove some low-value implementation tests that were getting in the way of other changes.
- Clean up `pub` visibility.
- Flatten some code using let-else.
- Prefer `.copied()` over `.cloned()`.
`@rustbot` label +A-code-coverage
These tests might have originally been useful as an implementation aid, but now
they don't provide enough value to justify the burden of updating them as the
underlying code changes.
The code they test is still exercised by the main end-to-end coverage tests.
As more and more of the span refiner's functionality has been pulled out into
separate early passes, it has finally reached the point where we can remove the
rest of the old `SpansRefiner` code, and replace it with a single
modestly-sized function.
coverage: Memoize and simplify counter expressions
When creating coverage counter expressions as part of coverage instrumentation, we often end up creating obviously-redundant expressions like `c1 + (c0 - c1)`, which is equivalent to just `c0`.
To avoid doing so, this PR checks when we would create an expression matching one of 5 patterns, and uses the simplified form instead:
- `(a - b) + b` → `a`.
- `(a + b) - b` → `a`.
- `(a + b) - a` → `b`.
- `a + (b - a)` → `b`.
- `a - (a - b)` → `b`.
Of all the different ways to combine 3 operands and 2 operators, these are the patterns that allow simplification.
(Some of those patterns currently don't occur in practice, but are included anyway for completeness, to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage support expands.)
---
This PR also adds memoization for newly-created (or newly-simplified) counter expressions, to avoid creating duplicates.
This currently makes no difference to the final mappings, but is expected to be useful for MC/DC coverage of match expressions, as proposed by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124278#issuecomment-2106754753.
This code for recalculating `mcdc_bitmap_bytes` doesn't provide any benefit,
because its result won't have changed from the value in `FunctionCoverageInfo`
that was computed during the MIR instrumentation pass.
Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for
completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and
MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
The code in `extract_mcdc_mappings` that allocates these bytes already knows
how many are needed in total, so there's no need to immediately recompute that
value in the calling function.
Now that branch and MC/DC mappings have been split out into separate types and
vectors, this enum is no longer needed, since it only represents ordinary
"code" regions.
(We can revisit this decision if we ever add support for other region kinds,
such as skipped regions or expansion regions. But at that point, we might just
add new structs/vectors for those kinds as well.)
Add decision_depth field to TVBitmapUpdate/CondBitmapUpdate statements
Add decision_depth field to BcbMappingKinds MCDCBranch and MCDCDecision
Add decision_depth field to MCDCBranchSpan and MCDCDecisionSpan
This clears the way for larger changes to how branches are handled by the
coverage instrumentor, in order to support branch coverage for more language
constructs.
