Also enable ICE file dumps on stable

[jieyouxu]

Proposal

Follow-up to Store ICE backtraces to disk and point end users at the file location #578, also enable ICE file dumps on stable to hopefully make ICE reports from stable rustc more informative and actionable, and make it easier / more likely for reporters to include the full backtrace.

Note that ICE dumps can be suppressed with RUSTC_ICE=0.

Draft PR: rust-lang/rust#133209

Relevant context (sorted by most recent first)

• Issue: Stable compilers don't emit ICE files? #132245
  • Example issue with stable ICE report: Error when using image crate #132240.
  • Notably, at the time the issue was open, stable compiler does not write and mention ICE files.
  • @saethlin mentioned that this was undesirable because "some fraction of the time people try to be helpful and abbreviate the compiler's output, and instead omit all the important information."
  • See some more discussion on this issue.
• ICE file dump PR: On nightly, dump ICE backtraces to disk #108714
  • Implemented ICE file dump infra but only enabled ICE file dump for nightly.
  • Merged Jul 2023.
  • ICE dump infra later modified by Don't modify libstd to dump rustc ICEs #115627.
• Previous ICE file dump MCP: Store ICE backtraces to disk and point end users at the file location #578
  • Zulip discussion: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/233931-xxx/topic/Store.20ICE.20backtraces.20to.20disk.20and.20point.20en.E2.80.A6.20compiler-team.23578

Mentors or Reviewers

@estebank, or WG-diagnostics or compiler

Process

The main points of the Major Change Process are as follows:

• File an issue describing the proposal.
• A compiler team member or contributor who is knowledgeable in the area can second by writing @rustbot second.
  • Finding a "second" suffices for internal changes. If however, you are proposing a new public-facing feature, such as a -C flag, then full team check-off is required.
  • Compiler team members can initiate a check-off via @rfcbot fcp merge on either the MCP or the PR.
• Once an MCP is seconded, the Final Comment Period begins. If no objections are raised after 10 days, the MCP is considered approved.

You can read more about Major Change Proposals on forge.

Comments

This issue is not meant to be used for technical discussion. There is a Zulip stream for that. Use this issue to leave procedural comments, such as volunteering to review, indicating that you second the proposal (or third, etc), or raising a concern that you would like to be addressed.

[rustbot]

This issue is not meant to be used for technical discussion. There is a Zulip stream for that. Use this issue to leave procedural comments, such as volunteering to review, indicating that you second the proposal (or third, etc), or raising a concern that you would like to be addressed.

Concerns or objections to the proposal should be discussed on Zulip and formally registered here by adding a comment with the following syntax:

@rustbot concern reason-for-concern 
<description of the concern> 

Concerns can be lifted with:

@rustbot resolve reason-for-concern 

See documentation at https://forge.rust-lang.org

cc @rust-lang/compiler

[saethlin]

@rustbot second

[jieyouxu]

@rustbot concern ice-dump-spam

@BoxyUwU: I would prefer not to put this on stable until we stop writing these files into the directory where the crate is located. If rustc is going to ICE then it's probably going to ICE multiple times, if you have check-on-save enabled then every save is another ICE file so you can easily wind up with dozens of ICE dumps written into your crate's directory which is a terrible experience
https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/233931-t-compiler.2Fmajor-changes/topic/Also.20enable.20ICE.20file.20dumps.20on.20stable.20compiler-team.23809/near/483289996

[jieyouxu]

@rustbot concern leak-user-info

See ICE dumps leak user names etc #128594

[jieyouxu]

I'm inclined to close this for now, the infra needs some more work before we can consider enabling it on stable.