Improve documentation for codegen options
This adds more information to many different codegen options. It should not add any new guarantees, just document existing behavior.
r? bjorn3
fix(test): Expose '--no-capture' in favor of `--nocapture`
This improves consistency with commonly expected CLI conventions,
avoiding a common stutter people make when running tests (trying what
they expect and then having to check the docs to then user whats
accepted).
An alternative could have been to take a value, like `--capture <value>` (e.g. `pytest` does this).
Overall, we're shifting focus for features to custom test harnesses (see #134283).
Most of `pytest`s modes will likely be irrelevant in that situation.
As for the rest, its too early to tell which, if any, may be relevant,
so we're sticking with this small, quality of life improvement.
I expect we'll warn about `--nocapture` being deprecated in the future after a sufficient transition period has been allowed.
By deprecating `--nocapture`, we intend that custom test harnesses do
not need to support it for reasons outside of their own compatibility
requirements, much like the deprecation in #134283
I'm punting for now on the naming of `RUST_TEST_NOCAPTURE`.
I feel like T-testing-devex should do a wider look at environment
variables role in lib`test` before evaluating whether to
- Deprecate it in favor of the user passing CLI flags or the test runner
providing its own config
- Deprecate in favor of `RUST_TEST_NO_CAPTURE`
- Deprecate in favor of `RUST_TEST_CAPTURE`
Other CLI flags were evaluated for casing consistency:
- `--logfile` has the same problem but was deprecated in #134283
Regarding the implementation, I moved `--nocapture` out of `optgroups()`, into `parse_opts()`, out of an abundance of caution in passing the options without a deprecated value to the usage generation. However, the usage does not actually show optional flags, so this could potentially be dropped, simplifying the PR.
Note: `compiletest` added `--no-capture` instead of `--nocapture` in #134809
T-testing-devex FCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/133073#issuecomment-2486921104Fixes#133073
mitigate MSVC alignment issue on x86-32
This implements mitigation for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/112480 by stopping to emit `align` attributes on loads and function arguments when building for a win32 MSVC target. MSVC is known to not properly align `u64` and similar types, and claiming to LLVM that everything is properly aligned increases the chance that this will cause problems.
Of course, the misalignment is still a bug, but we can't fix that bug, only MSVC can.
Also add an errata note to the platform support page warning users about this known problem.
try-job: `i686-msvc*`
replace broken links armv7-rtems-eabihf.md
Hi team , i found broken link in `src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/armv7-rtems-eabihf.md` and replace
thanks
Put them all on the same line with just their GitHub handles to make it
very easy to copy and paste (with ctrl-shift-v!!!) the names.
We have no use for email, so I removed all the emails, we don't care
about people's full names either.
Co-authored-by: Thalia Archibald <thalia@archibald.dev>
This updates the exploit mitigations chapter in the rustc book to use
the footnote feature of mdbook instead of manually implementing
footnotes with HTML.
This improves consistency with commonly expected CLI conventions,
avoiding a common stutter people make when running tests (trying what
they expect and then having to check the docs to then user whats
accepted).
An alternative could have been to take a value, like `--capture <value>` (e.g. `pytest` does this).
Overall, we're shifting focus for features to custom test harnesses (see #134283).
Most of `pytest`s modes will likely be irrelevant in that situation.
As for the rest, its too early to tell which, if any, may be relevant,
so we're sticking with this small, quality of life improvement.
By deprecating `--nocapture`, we intend that custom test harnesses do
not need to support it for reasons outside of their own compatibility
requirements, much like the deprecation in #134283
I'm punting for now on the naming of `RUST_TEST_NOCAPTURE`.
I feel like T-testing-devex should do a wider look at environment
variables role in lib`test` before evaluating whether to
- Deprecate it in favor of the user passing CLI flags or the test runner
providing its own config
- Deprecate in favor of `RUST_TEST_NO_CAPTURE`
- Deprecate in favor of `RUST_TEST_CAPTURE`
Other CLI flags were evaluated for casing consistency:
- `--logfile` has the same problem but was deprecated in #134283Fixes#133073
Add minimal x86_64-lynx-lynxos178 support.
Add minimal x86_64-lynx-lynxos178 support. It's possible to build no_std
programs with this compiler.
## Tier 3 Target Policy
> A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target
maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target. (The
mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
Tim Newsome (`@tnewsome-lynx)` will be the designated developer for
x86_64-lynx-lynxos178 support.
> Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a
target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same
name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and naming
conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust (such as in
other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to diverge. Changing the
name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially once the target reaches a
higher tier, so getting the name right is important even for a tier 3 target.
I believe the target is named appropriately.
> Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless
absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if the
name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect beliefs about
what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to disambiguate it.
The target name is not confusing.
> If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name.
Periods (.) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
Done.
> Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not
create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for
Rust developers or users.
> The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
> Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license
(MIT OR Apache-2.0).
All this new code is licensed under the Apache-2.0 license.
> The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other host
(even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend on any new
dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This applies whether
the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding new license exceptions
(as specified by the tidy tool in the rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the
dependency is a native library or binary. In other words, the introduction of
the target must not cause a user installing or running a version of Rust or the
Rust tools to be subject to any new license requirements.
Done.
> Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other code
for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling from
another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries. Host tools
built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime libraries
supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications built for the
target, but those libraries must not be required for code generation for the
target; cross-compilation to the target must not require such libraries at all.
For instance, rustc built for the target may depend on a common proprietary C
runtime library or console output library, but must not depend on a proprietary
code generation library or code optimization library. Rust's license permits
such combinations, but the Rust project has no interest in maintaining such
combinations within the scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
I think we're in the clear here. We do link against some static libraries that
are proprietary (like libm and libc), but those are not used to generate code.
E.g. the VxWorks target requires `wr-c++` to be installed, which is not
publically available.
> "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous"
legal/licensing terms include but are not limited to: non-disclosure
requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements (CLAs) or
equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms, requirements conditional
on the employer or employment of any particular Rust developers, revocable
terms, any requirements that create liability for the Rust project or its
developers or users, or any requirements that adversely affect the livelihood or
prospects of the Rust project or its developers or users.
Our intention is to allow anyone with access to LynxOS CDK to use Rust for it.
> Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any
binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving Rust
team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or
employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their decisions
regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval decisions
regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise participate in
discussions.
> This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being cited
in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or maintain support
for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a developer or team
responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not face any legal threats
or obligations that would prevent them from freely exercising their judgment in
such approval, even if such judgment involves subjective matters or goes beyond
the letter of these requirements.
No problem.
> Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries
as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets that can
support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an operating system or
equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but may leave some code
unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as appropriate), whether
because the target makes it impossible to implement or challenging to implement.
The authors of pull requests are not obligated to avoid calling any portions of
the standard library on the basis of a tier 3 target not implementing those
portions.
With this first PR, only core is supported. I am working on support for the std
library and intend to submit that once all the tests are passing.
> The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to
build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target
supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the
documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target,
using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
This is documented in `src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/lynxos178.md`.
> Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or
other developers in the community, to maintain the target. In particular, do not
post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a block on
the PR based on a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or notifications
(via any medium, including via `@)` to a PR author or others involved with a PR
regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
> Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to an
issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within reason.
However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not generate
notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested such
notifications.
Understood.
> Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2
or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without
approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3
target.
> In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets, such
as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid
introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the target
may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as appropriate,
to let each target run code supported by that target.
As far as I know this change does not affect any other targets.
> Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of rustc's
supported backends from any host target. (Having support in a fork of the
backend is not sufficient, it must be upstream.)
Many targets produce assembly for x86_64 so that also works for LynxOS-178.
It's possible to build no_std programs with this compiler.
> A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target
maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target. (The
mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
Tim Newsome (@tnewsome-lynx) will be the designated developer for
x86_64-lynx-lynxos178 support.
> Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a
target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same
name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and naming
conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust (such as in
other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to diverge. Changing the
name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially once the target reaches a
higher tier, so getting the name right is important even for a tier 3 target.
I believe the target is named appropriately.
> Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless
absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if the
name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect beliefs about
what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to disambiguate it.
The target name is not confusing.
> If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name.
Periods (.) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
Done.
> Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not
create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for
Rust developers or users.
> The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
> Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license
(MIT OR Apache-2.0).
All this new code is licensed under the Apache-2.0 license.
> The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other host
(even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend on any new
dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This applies whether
the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding new license exceptions
(as specified by the tidy tool in the rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the
dependency is a native library or binary. In other words, the introduction of
the target must not cause a user installing or running a version of Rust or the
Rust tools to be subject to any new license requirements.
Done.
> Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other code
for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling from
another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries. Host tools
built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime libraries
supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications built for the
target, but those libraries must not be required for code generation for the
target; cross-compilation to the target must not require such libraries at all.
For instance, rustc built for the target may depend on a common proprietary C
runtime library or console output library, but must not depend on a proprietary
code generation library or code optimization library. Rust's license permits
such combinations, but the Rust project has no interest in maintaining such
combinations within the scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
I think we're in the clear here. We do link against some static libraries that
are proprietary (like libm and libc), but those are not used to generate code.
E.g. the VxWorks target requires `wr-c++` to be installed, which is not
publically available.
> "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous"
legal/licensing terms include but are not limited to: non-disclosure
requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements (CLAs) or
equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms, requirements conditional
on the employer or employment of any particular Rust developers, revocable
terms, any requirements that create liability for the Rust project or its
developers or users, or any requirements that adversely affect the livelihood or
prospects of the Rust project or its developers or users.
Our intention is to allow anyone with access to LynxOS CDK to use Rust for it.
> Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any
binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving Rust
team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or
employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their decisions
regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval decisions
regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise participate in
discussions.
> This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being cited
in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or maintain support
for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a developer or team
responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not face any legal threats
or obligations that would prevent them from freely exercising their judgment in
such approval, even if such judgment involves subjective matters or goes beyond
the letter of these requirements.
No problem.
> Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries
as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets that can
support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an operating system or
equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but may leave some code
unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as appropriate), whether
because the target makes it impossible to implement or challenging to implement.
The authors of pull requests are not obligated to avoid calling any portions of
the standard library on the basis of a tier 3 target not implementing those
portions.
With this first PR, only core is supported. I am working on support for the std
library and intend to submit that once all the tests are passing.
> The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to
build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target
supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the
documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target,
using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
This is documented in `src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/lynxos_178.md`.
> Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or
other developers in the community, to maintain the target. In particular, do not
post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a block on
the PR based on a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or notifications
(via any medium, including via @) to a PR author or others involved with a PR
regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
> Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to an
issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within reason.
However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not generate
notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested such
notifications.
Understood.
> Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2
or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without
approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3
target.
> In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets, such
as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid
introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the target
may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as appropriate,
to let each target run code supported by that target.
As far as I know this change does not affect any other targets.
> Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of rustc's
supported backends from any host target. (Having support in a fork of the
backend is not sufficient, it must be upstream.)
Many targets produce assembly for x86_64 so that also works for LynxOS-178.
Update target maintainers for thumb targets to reflect new REWG Arm team name
Closes#139027
The name of the team responsible for these targets has changed as the team was merged with other Arm-related teams (see https://github.com/rust-embedded/wg/pull/818). The link gives an up-to-date list of github usernames that can be pinged, whereas the old email address is not very actively maintained or tracked.
Improve `xcrun` error handling
The compiler invokes `xcrun` on macOS when linking Apple targets, to find the Xcode SDK which contain all the necessary linker stubs. The error messages that `xcrun` outputs aren't always that great though, so this PR tries to improve that by providing extra context when an error occurs.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/56829.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/84534.
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/129432.
See also the alternative https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131433.
Tested on:
- `x86_64-apple-darwin`, MacBook Pro running Mac OS X 10.12.6
- With no tooling installed
- With Xcode 9.2
- With Xcode 9.2 Commandline Tools
- `aarch64-apple-darwin`, MacBook M2 Pro running macOS 14.7.4
- With Xcode 13.4.1
- With Xcode 16.2
- Inside `nix-shell -p xcbuild` (nixpkgs' `xcrun` shim)
- `aarch64-apple-darwin`, VM running macOS 15.3.1
- With no tooling installed
- With Xcode 16.2 Commandline Tools
``@rustbot`` label O-apple
r? compiler
CC ``@BlackHoleFox`` ``@thomcc``
I've intentionally used slightly vague language ("roughly"), as we don't
want to guarantee the exact invocation of `xcrun`, just hint that it's
close to that.
Add target maintainer information for powerpc64-unknown-linux-musl
We intend to fix the outstanding issues on the target and eventually promote it to tier 2. We have the capacity to maintain this target in the future and already perform regular builds of rustc for this target.
Currently, all host tools except miri build fine, but I have a patch for libffi-sys to make miri also compile fine for this target that is [pending review](https://github.com/tov/libffi-rs/pull/100).
While at it, add an option for the musl root for this target.
I also added a kernel version requirement, which is rather arbitrarily chosen, but it matches our tier 2 powerpc64le-unknown-linux-musl target so I think it is a good fit.
We intend to fix the outstanding issues on the target and eventually
promote it to tier 2. We have the capacity to maintain this target in
the future and already perform regular builds of rustc for this target.
Currently, all host tools except miri build fine, but I have a patch for
libffi-sys to make miri also compile fine for this target that is
pending review [1].
While at it, add an option for the musl root for this target.
[1]: https://github.com/tov/libffi-rs/pull/100
Signed-off-by: Jens Reidel <adrian@travitia.xyz>
change config.toml to bootstrap.toml
Currently, both Bootstrap and Cargo uses same name as their configuration file, which can be confusing. This PR is based on a discussion to rename `config.toml` to `bootstrap.toml` for Bootstrap. Closes: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/126875.
I have split the PR into atomic commits to make it easier to review. Once the changes are finalized, I will squash them. I am particularly concerned about the changes made to modules that are not part of Bootstrap. How should we handle those changes? Should we ping the respective maintainers?
