remove 'unordered' atomic intrinsics
As their doc comment already indicates, these operations do not currently have a place in our memory model. The intrinsics were introduced to support a hack in compiler-builtins, but that hack recently got removed (see https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-builtins/issues/788).
While LLVM is rather permissive in this regards, some other codegen
backends demand that once you declare a function for definition you
actually define contents of the function, which doesn't happen for naked
functions as we actually generate assembly for them.
add FCW to warn about wasm ABI transition
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/122532 for context: the "C" ABI on wasm32-unk-unk will change. The goal of this lint is to warn about any function definition and calls whose behavior will be affected by the change. My understanding is the following:
- scalar arguments are fine
- including 128 bit types, they get passed as two `i64` arguments in both ABIs
- `repr(C)` structs (recursively) wrapping a single scalar argument are fine (unless they have extra padding due to over-alignment attributes)
- all return values are fine
`@bjorn3` `@alexcrichton` `@Manishearth` is that correct?
I am making this a "show up in future compat reports" lint to maximize the chances people become aware of this. OTOH this likely means warnings for most users of Diplomat so maybe we shouldn't do this?
IIUC, wasm-bindgen should be unaffected by this lint as they only pass scalar types as arguments.
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138762
Transition plan blog post: https://github.com/rust-lang/blog.rust-lang.org/pull/1531
try-job: dist-various-2
Lower to a memset(undef) when Rvalue::Repeat repeats uninit
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138625.
It is technically correct to just do nothing. But if we actually do nothing, we may miss that this is de-initializing something, so instead we just lower to a single memset that writes undef. This is still superior to the memcpy loop, in both quality of code we hand to the backend and LLVM's final output.
Lower BinOp::Cmp to llvm.{s,u}cmp.* intrinsics
Lowers `mir::BinOp::Cmp` (`three_way_compare` intrinsic) to the corresponding LLVM `llvm.{s,u}cmp.i8.*` intrinsics.
These are the intrinsics mentioned in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/118310, which are now available in LLVM 19.
I couldn't find any follow-up PRs/discussions about this, please let me know if I missed something.
r? `@scottmcm`
atomic intrinsics: clarify which types are supported and (if applicable) what happens with provenance
The provenance semantics match what Miri implements and what the `AtomicPtr` API expects.
Don't `alloca` just to look at a discriminant
Today we're making LLVM do a bunch of extra work when you match on trivial stuff like `Option<bool>` or `ControlFlow<u8>`.
This PR changes that so that simple types like `Option<u32>` or `Result<(), Box<Error>>` can stay as `OperandValue::ScalarPair` and we can still read the discriminant from them, rather than needing to write them into memory to have a `PlaceValue` just to get the discriminant out.
Fixes#137503
attempt to support `BinaryFormat::Xcoff` in `naked_asm!`
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/137219
So, the inline assembly support for xcoff is extremely limited. The LLVM [XCOFFAsmParser](1b25c0c4da/llvm/lib/MC/MCParser/XCOFFAsmParser.cpp) does not support many of the attributes that LLVM itself emits, and that should exist based on [the assembler docs](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/ssw_aix_71/assembler/assembler_pdf.pdf). It also does accept some that should not exist based on those docs.
So, I've tried to do the best I can given those limitations. At least it's better than emitting the directives for elf and having that fail somewhere deep in LLVM. Given that inline assembly for this target is incomplete (under `asm_experimental_arch`), I think that's OK (and again I don't see how we can do better given the limitations in LLVM).
r? ```@Noratrieb``` (given that you reviewed https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/136637)
It seems reasonable to ping the [`powerpc64-ibm-aix` target maintainers](https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustc/platform-support/aix.html), hopefully they have thoughts too: ```@daltenty``` ```@gilamn5tr```
Don't re-`assume` in `transmute`s that don't change niches
I noticed in nightly 2025-02-21 that `transmute` is emitting way more `assume`s than necessary for newtypes.
For example, the three transmutes in <https://rust.godbolt.org/z/fW1KaTc4o> emits
```rust
define noundef range(i32 1, 0) i32 `@repeatedly_transparent_transmute(i32` noundef range(i32 1, 0) %_1) unnamed_addr {
start:
%0 = sub i32 %_1, 1
%1 = icmp ule i32 %0, -2
call void `@llvm.assume(i1` %1)
%2 = sub i32 %_1, 1
%3 = icmp ule i32 %2, -2
call void `@llvm.assume(i1` %3)
%4 = sub i32 %_1, 1
%5 = icmp ule i32 %4, -2
call void `@llvm.assume(i1` %5)
%6 = sub i32 %_1, 1
%7 = icmp ule i32 %6, -2
call void `@llvm.assume(i1` %7)
%8 = sub i32 %_1, 1
%9 = icmp ule i32 %8, -2
call void `@llvm.assume(i1` %9)
%10 = sub i32 %_1, 1
%11 = icmp ule i32 %10, -2
call void `@llvm.assume(i1` %11)
ret i32 %_1
}
```
But those are all just newtypes that don't change size or niches, so none of it's needed.
After this PR it's down to just
```rust
define noundef range(i32 1, 0) i32 `@repeatedly_transparent_transmute(i32` noundef range(i32 1, 0) %_1) unnamed_addr {
start:
ret i32 %_1
}
```
because none of those `assume`s in the original actually did anything.
(Transmuting to something with a difference niche, though, still has the assumes -- the other tests continue to pass checking that.)
Clean up various LLVM FFI things in codegen_llvm
cc ```@ZuseZ4``` I touched some autodiff parts
The major change of this PR is [bfd88ce](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/137549/commits/bfd88cead0dd79717f123ad7e9a26ecad88653cb) which makes `CodegenCx` generic just like `GenericBuilder`
The other commits mostly took advantage of the new feature of making extern functions safe, but also just used some wrappers that were already there and shrunk unsafe blocks.
best reviewed commit-by-commit
Add a span to `CompilerBuiltinsCannotCall`
Currently, this error emit a diagnostic with no context like:
error: `compiler_builtins` cannot call functions through upstream monomorphizations; encountered invalid call from `<math::libm::support::hex_float::Hexf<i32> as core::fmt::LowerHex>::fmt` to `core::fmt::num::<impl core::fmt::LowerHex for i32>::fmt`
With this change, it at least usually points to the problematic function:
error: `compiler_builtins` cannot call functions through upstream monomorphizations; encountered invalid call from `<math::libm::support::hex_float::Hexf<i32> as core::fmt::LowerHex>::fmt` to `core::fmt::num::<impl core::fmt::LowerHex for i32>::fmt`
--> src/../libm/src/math/support/hex_float.rs:270:5
|
270 | fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
