The `needs-asm-support` directive checks whether the host architecture
supports inline assembly, not the target architecture. For tests that
explicitly specify a target via `--target` in their compile-flags, this
directive is incorrect and unnecessary.
These tests are cross-compiling to specific targets (like x86_64, arm,
aarch64, riscv, etc.) that are already known to have stable asm support.
The directive was causing these tests to be incorrectly skipped on hosts
that don't support asm, even though the target does.
Tests with explicit targets should rely on `needs-llvm-components` to
ensure the appropriate backend is available, rather than checking host
asm support.
Improve documentation about `needs-asm-support` directive.
show supported register classes in error message
a simple diagnostic change that shows the supported register classes when an invalid one is found.
This information can be hard to find (especially for unstable targets), and this message now gives at least something to try or search for. I've followed the pattern for invalid clobber ABIs.
`@rustbot` label +A-inline-assembly
```
error[E0610]: `{integer}` is a primitive type and therefore doesn't have fields
--> $DIR/attempted-access-non-fatal.rs:7:15
|
LL | let _ = 2.l;
| ^
|
help: if intended to be a floating point literal, consider adding a `0` after the period and a `f64` suffix
|
LL - let _ = 2.l;
LL + let _ = 2.0f64;
|
```
Tweak type inference for `const` operands in inline asm
Previously these would be treated like integer literals and default to `i32` if a type could not be determined. To allow for forward-compatibility with `str` constants in the future, this PR changes type inference to use an unbound type variable instead.
The actual type checking is deferred until after typeck where we still ensure that the final type for the `const` operand is an integer type.
<!--
If this PR is related to an unstable feature or an otherwise tracked effort,
please link to the relevant tracking issue here. If you don't know of a related
tracking issue or there are none, feel free to ignore this.
This PR will get automatically assigned to a reviewer. In case you would like
a specific user to review your work, you can assign it to them by using
r? <reviewer name>
-->
Mention Register Size in `#[warn(asm_sub_register)]`
Fixes#121593
Displays the register size information obtained from `suggest_modifier()` and `default_modifier()`.
The `asm!` and `global_asm!` macros require their operands to appear
strictly in the following order:
- Template strings
- Positional operands
- Named operands
- Explicit register operands
- `clobber_abi`
- `options`
This is overly strict and can be inconvienent when building complex
`asm!` statements with macros. This PR relaxes the ordering requirements
as follows:
- Template strings must still come before all other operands.
- Positional operands must still come before named and explicit register
operands.
- Named and explicit register operands can be freely mixed.
- `options` and `clobber_abi` can appear in any position.
