[6.0][Concurrency] Fix how we obtain DA-as-A conformance for cross module #73840
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ktoso
changed the title
ktoso
added
distributed
|
@swift-ci please test |
ktoso
changed the title
Resolves rdar://127206143
ktoso
force-pushed
the
pick-da-as-a-conformance-fix-cross-module
branch
from
9fc5375 to
dd01d1b
Compare
|
@swift-ci please test |
hborla
approved these changes
May 28, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description: The newly introduced in #71043 builtin for creating an ad-hoc conformance did not handle cross-module situations. This PR resolves the issue and cleans up how we create this conformance, such that we only create it once.
Scope/Impact: Affects any distributed actor use there a "distributed actor as actor" isolation conversion happens -- these happen implicitly when #isolation is used and could crash compilation without this fix.
Risk: Low, very specific piece of code affected and well tested.
Testing: CI testing and manually verified in reproducer project and distributed cluster
Reviewed by: @DougGregor @slavapestov
Original PR: #73781
Radar: rdar://127206143