Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #131200 (Handle `rustc_query_system` cases of `rustc::potential_query_instability` lint)
- #141244 (windows: document that we rely on an undocumented property of GetUserProfileDirectoryW)
- #141247 (skip compiler tools sanity checks on certain commands)
- #141248 (fix data race in ReentrantLock fallback for targets without 64bit atomics)
- #141249 (introduce common macro for `MutVisitor` and `Visitor` to dedup code)
- #141253 (Warning added when dependency crate has async drop types, and the feature is disabled)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
fix data race in ReentrantLock fallback for targets without 64bit atomics
See [Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/269128-miri/topic/reentrant.20lock.20failure.20on.20musl) for details: the address used to identify a thread might get lazily allocated inside `tls_addr()`, so if we call that *after* doing the `tls_addr.load()` it is too late to establish synchronization with prior threads that used the same address -- the `load()` thus races with the `store()` by that prior thread, and might hence see outdated values, and then the entire logic breaks down.
r? `@joboet`
dladdr cannot leave dli_fname to be null
There are two places in the repo calling `dladdr`, and they are inconsistent wrt their assumption of whether the `dli_fname` field can be null. Let's make them consistent. I see nothing in the docs that allows it to be null, but just to be on the safe side let's make this an assertion so hopefully we get a report if that ever happens.
make `rustc_attr_parsing` less dominant in the rustc crate graph
It has/had a glob re-export of `rustc_attr_data_structures`, which is a crate much lower in the graph, and a lot of crates were using it *just* (or *mostly*) for that re-export, while they can rely on `rustc_attr_data_structures` directly.
Previous graph:
Graph with this PR:
The first commit keeps the re-export, and just changes the dependency if possible. The second commit is the "breaking change" which removes the re-export, and "explicitly" adds the `rustc_attr_data_structures` dependency where needed. It also switches over some src/tools/*.
The second commit is actually a lot more involved than I expected. Please let me know if it's a better idea to back it out and just keep the first commit.
bump windows crate for compiler,bootstrap and tools
This dedupes crate versions. For `x86_64-pc-windows-msvc` stage1 cuts few kb from `rustc_driver.dll`, nice.
split `asm!` parsing and validation
This PR splits `asm!` parsing and validation into two separate steps.
The parser constructs a `Vec<RawAsmArg>`, with each element corresponding to an argument to one of the `asm!` macros.
The validation then checks things like ordering of arguments or that options are not provided twice.
The motivation is https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/140279, which wants to add `#[cfg(...)]` support to these arguments. This support can now be added in a straightforward way by adding an `attributes: ast::AttrVec` field to `RawAsmArg`.
An extra reason for this split is that `rustfmt` probably wants to format the assembly at some point (currently that appears to be stubbed out, and the formatting is unstable https://github.com/rust-lang/style-team/issues/152).
r? ``@ghost`` (just want to look at CI for now)
cc ``@ytmimi`` we discussed asm formatting a little while ago in https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/issues/6526. Am I correct in assuming that `AsmArgs` does not give enough information for formatting, but that `RawAsmArgs` would (it e.g. does not join information from multiple lines). This must have been an issue before?
try-job: aarch64-apple
