- `Ident::from_str_and_span` -> `Ident::new` when the string is
pre-interned.
- `Ident::from_str` -> `Ident::with_dummy_span` when the string is
pre-interned.
- `_d` and `_e` are unused.
`{{root}}` is supposed to be an internal-only name but it shows up in
the output.
(I'm working towards a more general fix -- a universal "joiner" function
that can be used all over the place -- but I'm not there yet, so let's
fix this one in-place for now.)
Change __rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable to be a function
This fixes a long sequence of issues:
1. A customer reported that building for Arm64EC was broken: #138541
2. This was caused by a bug in my original implementation of Arm64EC support, namely that only functions on Arm64EC need to be decorated with `#` but Rust was decorating statics as well.
3. Once I corrected Rust to only decorate functions, I started linking failures where the linker couldn't find statics exported by dylib dependencies. This was caused by the compiler not marking exported statics in the generated DEF file with `DATA`, thus they were being exported as functions not data.
4. Once I corrected the way that the DEF files were being emitted, the linker started failing saying that it couldn't find `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable`. This is because the MSVC linker requires the declarations of statics imported from other dylibs to be marked with `dllimport` (whereas it will happily link to functions imported from other dylibs whether they are marked `dllimport` or not).
5. I then made a change to ensure that `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` was marked as `dllimport`, but the MSVC linker started emitting warnings that `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` was marked as `dllimport` but was declared in an obj file. This is a harmless warning which is a performance hint: anything that's marked `dllimport` must be indirected via an `__imp` symbol so I added a linker arg in the target to suppress the warning.
6. A customer then reported a similar warning when using `lld-link` (<https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/140176#issuecomment-2872448443>). I don't think it was an implementation difference between the two linkers but rather that, depending on the obj that the declaration versus uses of `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` landed in we would get different warnings, so I suppressed that warning as well: #140954.
7. Another customer reported that they weren't using the Rust compiler to invoke the linker, thus these warnings were breaking their build: <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/140176#issuecomment-2881867433>. At that point, my original change was reverted (#141024) leaving Arm64EC broken yet again.
Taking a step back, a lot of these linker issues arise from the fact that `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` is marked as `extern "Rust"` in the standard library and, therefore, assumed to be a foreign item from a different crate BUT the Rust compiler may choose to generate it either in the current crate, some other crate that will be statically linked in OR some other crate that will by dynamically imported.
Worse yet, it is impossible while building a given crate to know if `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` will statically linked or dynamically imported: it might be that one of its dependent crates is the one with an allocator kind set and thus that crate (which is compiled later) will decide depending if it has any dylib dependencies or not to import `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` or generate it. Thus, there is no way to know if the declaration of `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` should be marked with `dllimport` or not.
There is a simple fix for all this: there is no reason `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` must be a static. It needs to be some symbol that must be linked in; thus, it could easily be a function instead. As a function, there is no need to mark it as `dllimport` when dynamically imported which avoids the entire mess above.
There may be a perf hit for changing the `volatile load` to be a `tail call`, so I'm happy to change that part back (although I question what the codegen of a `volatile load` would look like, and if the backend is going to try to use load-acquire semantics).
Build with this change applied BEFORE #140176 was reverted to demonstrate that there are no linking issues with either MSVC or MinGW: <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/actions/runs/15078657205>
Incidentally, I fixed `tests/run-make/no-alloc-shim` to work with MSVC as I needed it to be able to test locally (FYI for #128602)
r? `@bjorn3`
cc `@jieyouxu`
Rewrite `inline` attribute parser to use new infrastructure and improve diagnostics for all parsed attributes
r? `@oli-obk`
This PR:
- creates a new parser for inline attributes
- creates consistent error messages and error codes between attribute parsers; inline and others
- as such changes a few error messages for other attributes to be (in my eyes) much more consistent
- tests ast-lowering lints introduced by rust-lang/rust#138164 since this is now useful for the first time
- Coalesce some useless error codes
Builds on top of rust-lang/rust#138164Closesrust-lang/rust#137950
Temporarily add back -Zwasm-c-abi=spec
This allows a more gradual transition path for projects that need to use use the spec-complaint C ABI both with older and newer rustc versions.
Refresh module-level docs for `rustc_target::spec`
We have long since gone on a curveball from the flexible-target-specification RFC by introducing stability and soundness promises to the language and compiler which we often struggle with extending to target-specific implementation details. Indeed, we often *literally cannot*. We also have modified the search algorithm details. Update the comments for `rustc_target::spec` considerably.
Sized Hierarchy: Part I
This patch implements the non-const parts of rust-lang/rfcs#3729. It introduces two new traits to the standard library, `MetaSized` and `PointeeSized`. See the RFC for the rationale behind these traits and to discuss whether this change makes sense in the abstract.
These traits are unstable (as is their constness), so users cannot refer to them without opting-in to `feature(sized_hierarchy)`. These traits are not behind `cfg`s as this would make implementation unfeasible, there would simply be too many `cfg`s required to add the necessary bounds everywhere. So, like `Sized`, these traits are automatically implemented by the compiler.
RFC 3729 describes changes which are necessary to preserve backwards compatibility given the introduction of these traits, which are implemented and as follows:
- `?Sized` is rewritten as `MetaSized`
- `MetaSized` is added as a default supertrait for all traits w/out an explicit sizedness supertrait already.
There are no edition migrations implemented in this, as these are primarily required for the constness parts of the RFC and prior to stabilisation of this (and so will come in follow-up PRs alongside the const parts). All diagnostic output should remain the same (showing `?Sized` even if the compiler sees `MetaSized`) unless the `sized_hierarchy` feature is enabled.
Due to the use of unstable extern types in the standard library and rustc, some bounds in both projects have had to be relaxed already - this is unfortunate but unavoidable so that these extern types can continue to be used where they were before. Performing these relaxations in the standard library and rustc are desirable longer-term anyway, but some bounds are not as relaxed as they ideally would be due to the inability to relax `Deref::Target` (this will be investigated separately).
It is hoped that this is implemented such that it could be merged and these traits could exist "under the hood" without that being observable to the user (other than in any performance impact this has on the compiler, etc). Some details might leak through due to the standard library relaxations, but this has not been observed in test output.
**Notes:**
- Any commits starting with "upstream:" can be ignored, as these correspond to other upstream PRs that this is based on which have yet to be merged.
- This best reviewed commit-by-commit. I've attempted to make the implementation easy to follow and keep similar changes and test output updates together.
- Each commit has a short description describing its purpose.
- This patch is large but it's primarily in the test suite.
- I've worked on the performance of this patch and a few optimisations are implemented so that the performance impact is neutral-to-minor.
- `PointeeSized` is a different name from the RFC just to make it more obvious that it is different from `std::ptr::Pointee` but all the names are yet to be bikeshed anyway.
- `@nikomatsakis` has confirmed [that this can proceed as an experiment from the t-lang side](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/435869-project-goals/topic/SVE.20and.20SME.20on.20AArch64.20.28goals.23270.29/near/506196491)
- FCP in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/137944#issuecomment-2912207485Fixesrust-lang/rust#79409.
r? `@ghost` (I'll discuss this with relevant teams to find a reviewer)
Set elf e_flags on ppc64 targets according to abi
(This PR contains the non user-facing changes of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/142321)
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85589 by making sure that ld.lld errors out instead of generating a broken binary.
Basically the problem is that ld.lld assumes that all ppc64 object files with e_flags=0 are object files which use the ELFv2 ABI (this here is the check https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/lld/ELF/Arch/PPC64.cpp#L639).
This pull request sets the correct e_flags to indicate the used ABI so ld.lld errors out when encountering ELFv1 ABI files instead of generating a broken binary.
For example compare code generation for this program (file name ``min.rs``):
```rust
#![feature(no_core, lang_items, repr_simd)]
#![crate_type = "bin"]
#![no_core]
#![no_main]
#[lang = "sized"]
trait Sized {}
#[lang = "copy"]
trait Copy {}
#[lang = "panic_cannot_unwind"]
pub fn panic() -> ! {
loop {}
}
pub fn my_rad_unmangled_function() {
loop {}
}
pub fn my_rad_function() {
loop {}
}
#[no_mangle]
pub fn _start() {
my_rad_unmangled_function();
my_rad_function();
}
```
Compile with ``rustc --target=powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu -C linker=ld.lld -C relocation-model=static min.rs``
Before change:
```
$ llvm-objdump -d min
Disassembly of section .text:
000000001001030c <.text>:
...
10010334: 7c 08 02 a6 mflr 0
10010338: f8 21 ff 91 stdu 1, -112(1)
1001033c: f8 01 00 80 std 0, 128(1)
10010340: 48 02 00 39 bl 0x10030378 <_ZN3min25my_rad_unmangled_function17h7471c49af58039f5E>
10010344: 60 00 00 00 nop
10010348: 48 02 00 49 bl 0x10030390 <_ZN3min15my_rad_function17h37112b8fd1008c9bE>
1001034c: 60 00 00 00 nop
...
```
The branch instructions ``bl 0x10030378`` and ``bl 0x10030390`` are jumping into the ``.opd`` section which is data. That is a broken binary (because fixing those branches is the task of the linker).
After change:
```
error: linking with `ld.lld` failed: exit status: 1
|
= note: "ld.lld" "/tmp/rustcNYKZCS/symbols.o" "<1 object files omitted>" "--as-needed" "-L" "/tmp/rustcNYKZCS/raw-dylibs" "-Bdynamic" "--eh-frame-hdr" "-z" "noexecstack" "-L" "<sysroot>/lib/rustlib/powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib" "-o" "min" "--gc-sections" "-z" "relro" "-z" "now"
= note: some arguments are omitted. use `--verbose` to show all linker arguments
= note: ld.lld: error: /tmp/rustcNYKZCS/symbols.o: ABI version 1 is not supported
```
Which is correct because ld.lld doesn't support ELFv1 ABI.
Revert overeager warning for misuse of `--print native-static-libs`
In a PR to emit warnings on misuse of `--print native-static-libs`, we did not consider the matter of composing parts of build systems. If you are not directly invoking rustc, it can be difficult to know when you will in fact compile a staticlib, so making sure uses `--print native-static-lib` correctly can be just a nuisance.
Next cycle we can reland a slightly more narrowly focused variant or one that focuses on `--emit` instead of `--print native-static-libs`. But in its current state, I am not sure the warning is very useful.
Make sure to propagate result from `visit_expr_fields`
We weren't propagating the `ControlFlow::Break` out of a struct field, which means that the solution implemented in rust-lang/rust#130443 didn't work for nested fields.
Fixesrust-lang/rust#142525.
Reject union default field values
Fixesrust-lang/rust#142555.
The [`default_field_values` RFC][rfc] does not specify that default field values may be used on `union`s, and it's not clear how default field values may be used with `union`s without an design extension to the RFC. So, for now, reject trying to use default field values with `union`s.
### Review notes
- The first commit adds the `union` with default field values test case to `tests/ui/structs/default-field-values/failures.rs`, where `union`s with default field values are currently accepted.
- The second commit rejects trying to supply default field values to `union` definitions.
- When `default_field_values` feature gate is disabled, we show the feature gate error when the user tries to write `union`s with default field values. When the feature gate is enabled, we reject this usage with
> unions cannot have default field values
``@rustbot`` label: +F-default_field_values
[rfc]: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3681-default-field-values.html
Manually invalidate caches in SimplifyCfg.
The current `SimplifyCfg` pass unconditionally invalidates CFG caches. This is unfortunate if there are no modifications that require this invalidation.
`nominal_obligations` calls `predicates_of` on a `Sized` obligation,
effectively elaborating the trait and making the well-formedness checking
machinery do a bunch of extra work checking a `MetaSized` obligation is
well-formed, but given that both `Sized` and `MetaSized` are built-ins,
if `Sized` is otherwise well-formed, so `MetaSized` will be.
As a performance optimization, skip elaborating the supertraits of
`Sized`, and if a `MetaSized` obligation is being checked, then look for
a `Sized` predicate in the parameter environment. This makes the
`ParamEnv` smaller which should improve compiler performance as it avoids
all the iteration over the larger `ParamEnv`.
When printing impl headers in a diagnostic, the compiler has to account
for `?Sized` implying `MetaSized` and new `MetaSized` and `PointeeSized`
bounds.
Like `Sized` diagnostics, sorting `MetaSized` and `PointeeSized`
diagnostics last prevents earlier more useful diagnostics from being
skipped because there has already been error tainting.
Given the necessary additions of bounds to these traits and their impls
in the standard library, it is necessary to add `MetaSized` bounds to
the obligation which is proven as part of checking for dyn
dispatchability.
Opting-out of `Sized` with `?Sized` is now equivalent to adding a
`MetaSized` bound, and adding a `MetaSized` or `PointeeSized` bound
is equivalent to removing the default `Sized` bound - this commit
implements this change in `rustc_hir_analysis::hir_ty_lowering`.
`MetaSized` is also added as a supertrait of all traits, as this is
necessary to preserve backwards compatibility.
Unfortunately, non-global where clauses being preferred over item bounds
(where `PointeeSized` bounds would be proven) - which can result in
errors when a `PointeeSized` supertrait/bound/predicate is added to some
items. Rather than `PointeeSized` being a bound on everything, it can
be the absence of a bound on everything, as `?Sized` was.
As core uses an extern type (`ptr::VTable`), the default `?Sized` to
`MetaSized` migration isn't sufficient, and some code that previously
accepted `VTable` needs relaxed to continue to accept extern types.
Similarly, the compiler uses many extern types in `rustc_codegen_llvm`
and in the `rustc_middle::ty::List` implementation (`OpaqueListContents`)
some bounds must be relaxed to continue to accept these types.
Unfortunately, due to the current inability to relax `Deref::Target`,
some of the bounds in the standard library are forced to be stricter than
they ideally would be.
In a PR to emit warnings on misuse of `--print native-static-libs`,
we did not consider the matter of composing parts of build systems.
If you are not directly invoking rustc, it can be difficult to know
when you will in fact compile a staticlib, so making sure everyone
uses `--print native-static-lib` correctly can be just a nuisance.
This reverts the following commits:
- f66787a08d
- 72a9219e82
- 98bb597c05
- c59b70841c
Next cycle we can reland a slightly more narrowly focused variant or one
that focuses on `--emit` instead of `--print native-static-libs`.
But in its current state, I am not sure the warning is very useful.
