interpret: Unify projections for MPlaceTy, PlaceTy, OpTy
For ~forever, we didn't really have proper shared code for handling projections into those three types. This is mostly because `PlaceTy` projections require `&mut self`: they might have to `force_allocate` to be able to represent a project part-way into a local.
This PR finally fixes that, by enhancing `Place::Local` with an `offset` so that such an optimized place can point into a part of a place without having requiring an in-memory representation. If we later write to that place, we will still do `force_allocate` -- for now we don't have an optimized path in `write_immediate` that would avoid allocation for partial overwrites of immediately stored locals. But in `write_immediate` we have `&mut self` so at least this no longer pollutes all our type signatures.
(Ironically, I seem to distantly remember that many years ago, `Place::Local` *did* have an `offset`, and I removed it to simplify things. I guess I didn't realize why it was so useful... I am also not sure if this was actually used to achieve place projection on `&self` back then.)
The `offset` had type `Option<Size>`, where `None` represent "no projection was applied". This is needed because locals *can* be unsized (when they are arguments) but `Place::Local` cannot store metadata: if the offset is `None`, this refers to the entire local, so we can use the metadata of the local itself (which must be indirect); if a projection gets applied, since the local is indirect, it will turn into a `Place::Ptr`. (Note that even for indirect locals we can have `Place::Local`: when the local appears in MIR, we always start with `Place::Local`, and only check `frame.locals` later. We could eagerly normalize to `Place::Ptr` but I don't think that would actually simplify things much.)
Having done all that, we can finally properly abstract projections: we have a new `Projectable` trait that has the basic methods required for projecting, and then all projection methods are implemented for anything that implements that trait. We can even implement it for `ImmTy`! (Not that we need that, but it seems neat.) The visitor can be greatly simplified; it doesn't need its own trait any more but it can use the `Projectable` trait. We also don't need the separate `Mut` visitor any more; that was required only to reflect that projections on `PlaceTy` needed `&mut self`.
It is possible that there are some more `&mut self` that can now become `&self`... I guess we'll notice that over time.
r? `@oli-obk`
Add `riscv64gc-unknown-hermit` target
This PR adds the new `riscv64gc-unknown-hermit` target, initially created by `@simonschoening,` a 64-bit RISC-V target for the [Hermit] unikernel project.
Furthermore, this cleans up the existing Hermit targets and adds a platform support documentation page for _all_ Hermit targets and goes through the new tier 3 target policy process:
[Hermit]: https://github.com/hermitcore
## 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.)
`@stlankes` as the Hermit project lead and I will be the target maintainers.
> - 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.
> - 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.
> - If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name.
> Periods (`.`) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
The target name `riscv64gc-unknown-hermit` was derived from the existing `x86_64-unknown-hermit` and `aarch64-unknown-hermit` targets.
> - 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`).
> - 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.
> - 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.
> - "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.
No dependencies were added to Rust.
> - 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.
Understood.
I am not a member of a Rust team.
> - 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.
Understood.
`std` is supported.
> - 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.
Building is described in the platform support doc.
> - 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.
I don't think this PR breaks anything.
r? compiler-team
rust-installer: Use env(1) in the shebang.
This fixes the case (e.g. *BSD) where bash is installed on the host system, but not at the typical location of /bin.
make full field retagging the default
The 'scalar' field retagging mode is clearly a hack -- it mirrors details of the codegen backend and how various structs are represented in LLVM. This means whether code has UB or not depends on surprising aspects, such as whether a struct has 2 or 3 (non-zero-sized) fields. Now that both hashbrown and scopeguard have released fixes to be compatible with field retagging, I think it is time to enable full field retagging by default.
`@saethlin` do you have an idea of how much fallout enabling full field retagging by default will cause? Do you have objections to enabling it by default?
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2528
Implement rust-lang/compiler-team#578.
When an ICE is encountered on nightly releases, the new rustc panic
handler will also write the contents of the backtrace to disk. If any
`delay_span_bug`s are encountered, their backtrace is also added to the
file. The platform and rustc version will also be collected.
add mips64r6 and mips32r6 as target_arch values
This PR introduces `"mips32r6"` and `"mips64r6"` as valid `target_arch` values, and would be the arch value used by Tier-3 targets `mipsisa32r6-unknown-linux-gnu`, `mipsisa32r6el-unknown-linux-gnu`, `mipsisa64r6-unknown-linux-gnuabi64` and `mipsisa64r6el-unknown-linux-gnuabi64`.
This PR was inspired by `rustix` attempting to link traditional mips64el objects with mips64r6el objects when building for mips64r6, even though `rustix` recently removed outline assembly support. This is because currently this target's `target_arch` is `"mips64"` and rustix has its respective assembly implementation as well as a pre-compiled little-endian static library prepared for mips64el, a tier-2 target with the same `target_arch`. After some [discussions on zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/233931-t-compiler.2Fmajor-changes/topic/Add.20New.20Values.20To.20MIPS_ALLOWED_FEATURES.20compiler-team.23595), I decided to treat mips64r6 as an independent architecture from Rust's POV, since these two architectures are incompatible anyway.
This PR is now waiting for `libc` to release a new version with [support](https://github.com/rust-lang/libc/pull/3268) for these `target_arch` values. It is not expected to introduce changes to any other target, especially Tier-1 and Tier-2 targets.
This PR has its corresponding [MCP](https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/632) approved.
Fix compiletest windows path finding with spaces
With `(?x)` enabled spaces are ignored unless you escape them, so the space wasn't being added to the character class
I don't think this makes any difference to the current test suite, but it could save someone a headache in the future
Rename `arg_iter` to `iter_instantiated`
`arg_iter` doesn't make sense, and doesn't really indicate what it's doing (returning an iterator that ~~substitutes~~ instantiates its elements).
`iter_instantiated_copied` is kinda awkward but i don't really wanna bikeshed it.
r? `@oli-obk`
miri: fail when calling a function that requires an unavailable target feature
miri will report an UB when calling a function that has a `#[target_feature(enable = ...)]` attribute is called and the required feature is not available.
"Available features" are the same that `is_x86_feature_detected!` (or equivalent) reports to be available during miri execution (which can be enabled or disabled with the `-C target-feature` flag).
