Bringing `rustc_rayon_core` in tree as `rustc_thread_pool`
This PR moves [`rustc_rayon_core`](5fadf44/rayon-core) from commit `5fadf44` as suggested in [this zulip thread](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/187679-t-compiler.2Fparallel-rustc/topic/Bringing.20.60rustc_rayon_core.60.20in.20tree). I tried to split the work into separate commits so it is easy to review. The first commit is a simple copy and paste from the fork, and subsequent changes were made to use the new crate and to ensure the new crate complies with different format and lint expectations.
**Call-out:** I was also wondering if I need to make any further changes to accommodate licensing requirements.
r? oli-obk
CodeGen: rework Aggregate implemention for rvalue_creates_operand cases
A non-trivial refactor pulled out from rust-lang/rust#138759
r? workingjubilee
The previous implementation I'd written here based on `index_by_increasing_offset` is complicated to follow and difficult to extend to non-structs.
This changes the implementation, without actually changing any codegen (thus no test changes either), to be more like the existing `extract_field` (<2b0274c71d/compiler/rustc_codegen_ssa/src/mir/operand.rs (L345-L425)>) in that it allows setting a particular field directly.
Notably I've found this one much easier to get right, in particular because having the `OperandRef<Result<V, Scalar>>` gives a really useful thing to include in ICE messages if something did happen to go wrong.
Another refactor pulled out from 138759
The previous implementation I'd written here based on `index_by_increasing_offset` is complicated to follow and difficult to extend to non-structs.
This changes the implementation, without actually changing any codegen (thus no test changes either), to be more like the existing `extract_field` (<2b0274c71d/compiler/rustc_codegen_ssa/src/mir/operand.rs (L345-L425)>) in that it allows setting a particular field directly.
Notably I've found this one much easier to get right, in particular because having the `OperandRef<Result<V, Scalar>>` gives a really useful thing to include in ICE messages if something did happen to go wrong.
Infrastructure for lints during attribute parsing, specifically duplicate usages of attributes
r? `@oli-obk`
This PR adds a new field to OwnerInfo to buffer lints which are generated during attribute parsing and ast lowering in general. They can't be emitted at this stage because at that point there's no HIR yet, and early lints are already emitted.
This also adds the generic `S: Stage` to attribute parsers. Currently we don't emit any lints during early attribute parsing, but if we ever want to that logic will be different. That's because there we don't have hir ids yet, while at the same time still having access to node ids and early lints. Even though that logic isn't completely there in this PR (no worries, we don't use it), that's why the parameter is there.
With this PR, we also add 2 associated consts to `SingleAttributeParser`. Those determine what logic should be applied when finding a duplicate attribute.
This PR was getting pretty large, so the first code using this logic is in rust-lang/rust#138165. This code is all new things that weren't possible before so it also doesn't break any behaviour. However, some of it will be dead code right now. I recommend reviewing both before merging, though in some sense that doubles the size of the review again, and the other PR might be more controversial. Let me know how you want to do this `@oli-obk`
It's not clear to me how we ended up with the other order here --
hopefully this isn't an indicator of some form of instability in Cargo?
But either order is fine...
Add (back) `unsupported_calling_conventions` lint to reject more invalid calling conventions
This adds back the `unsupported_calling_conventions` lint that was removed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/129935, in order to start the process of dealing with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/137018. Specifically, we are going for the plan laid out [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/137018#issuecomment-2672118326):
- thiscall, stdcall, fastcall, cdecl should only be accepted on x86-32
- vectorcall should only be accepted on x86-32 and x86-64
The difference to the status quo is that:
- We stop accepting stdcall, fastcall on targets that are windows && non-x86-32 (we already don't accept these on targets that are non-windows && non-x86-32)
- We stop accepting cdecl on targets that are non-x86-32
- (There is no difference for thiscall, this was already a hard error on non-x86-32)
- We stop accepting vectorcall on targets that are windows && non-x86-*
Vectorcall is an unstable ABI so we can just make this a hard error immediately. The others are stable, so we emit the `unsupported_calling_conventions` forward-compat lint. I set up the lint to show up in dependencies via cargo's future-compat report immediately, but we could also make it show up just for the local crate first if that is preferred.
try-job: i686-msvc-1
try-job: x86_64-msvc-1
try-job: test-various
Replace all uses of sysroot_candidates with get_or_default_sysroot
Before this change we had two different ways to attempt to locate the sysroot which are inconsistently used:
* `get_or_default_sysroot` which tries to locate based on the 0th cli argument and if that doesn't work falls back to locating it using the librustc_driver.so location and returns a single path.,
* `sysroot_candidates` which takes the former and additionally does another attempt at locating using `librustc_driver.so` except without linux multiarch handling and then returns both paths.,
The latter was originally introduced to be able to locate the codegen backend back when cg_llvm was dynamically linked even for a custom driver when the `--sysroot` passed in does not contain a copy of cg_llvm. Back then `get_or_default_sysroot` did not attempt to locate the sysroot based on the location of librustc_driver.so yet. Because that is now done, the only case where removing `sysroot_candidates` can break things is if you have a custom driver inside what looks like a sysroot including the `lib/rustlib` directory, but which is missing some parts of the full sysroot like eg rust-lld.
Follow up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/138404
Many of `std`'s dependency have a dependency on the crates.io
`compiler-builtins` when used with the feature
`rustc-std-workspace-core`. Use a Cargo patch to select the in-tree
version instead.
`compiler-builtins` is also added as a dependency of
`rustc-std-workspace-core` so these crates can remove their crates.io
dependency in the future.
Before this commit, serde_derive is built before serde. But serde does
not depend on serde_derive, so that is not needed. Instead, build serde
and serde_derive in parallel.
This speeds up compilation for users depending on rustdoc-json-types out
of tree.
Imports: https://www.github.com/rust-lang/rustdoc-types/pull/49
Co-authored-by: Martin Nordholts <martin.nordholts@codetale.se>
Report text_direction_codepoint_in_literal when parsing
The lint is now reported in code that gets removed/modified/duplicated by macro expansion, and spans are more accurate so we don't get ICEs from trying to split a span in the middle of a character.
This removes support for lint level attributes for `text_direction_codepoint_in_literal` except at the crate level, I don't think that there's an easy way around this when the lint can be reported on code that's removed by `cfg` or that is only in the input of a macro.
Fixes#140281
Do not get proc_macro from the sysroot in rustc
With the stage0 refactor the proc_macro version found in the sysroot will no longer always match the proc_macro version that proc-macros get compiled with by the rustc executable that uses this proc_macro. This will cause problems as soon as the ABI of the bridge gets changed to implement new features or change the way existing features work.
To fix this, this commit changes rustc crates to depend directly on the local version of proc_macro which will also be used in the sysroot that rustc will build.
With the stage0 refactor the proc_macro version found in the sysroot
will no longer always match the proc_macro version that proc-macros get
compiled with by the rustc executable that uses this proc_macro. This
will cause problems as soon as the ABI of the bridge gets changed to
implement new features or change the way existing features work.
To fix this, this commit changes rustc crates to depend directly on the
local version of proc_macro which will also be used in the sysroot that
rustc will build.
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.
Update miniz_oxide dependency of coverage_dump
This was the final subproject that depended on ```miniz_oxide``` 0.7.x after the rest were when updating the ```backtrace-rs``` dependency in in #140705. Older versions of ```miniz_oxide``` got hit by a [serious](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132636) performance regression in rust 1.82 (which has been worked around in more recent versions of the library) so should really be avoided if possible (granted it only affects compression so not sure if it had much impact in practice here, though there have also been some other performance improvements since .)
This also means no longer having to build two versions of miniz_oxide as everything can now use the same version, and no longer needing to build both ```adler``` and ```adler2```
Prefer to suggest stable candidates rather than unstable ones
Fixes#140240
The logic is to replace unstable suggestions if we meet a new stable one, and do nothing if any other situation. In old logic, we just use the first candidate we meet as the suggestion for the same items.
E.g., `std::range::legacy::Range` vs `std::ops::Range`, `legacy` in the former is unstable, we prefer to suggest use the latter.
