Disable run-make/split-debuginfo test for RISC-V 64
Together with `@Hoverbear,` we've been improving the state of the riscv64gc-unknown-linux-gnu target.
This is in relation to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/125220 where `tests/ui/debuginfo/debuginfo-emit-llvm-ir-and-split-debuginfo.rs` was disabled for RISC-V 64 in that another test, `tests/run-make/split-debuginfo` also needs to be disabled due to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/56642 and the changes made in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120518.
This test appears to be a host test, not a target test, so it isn't seen failing in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/126641, however, we are in the process of testing host tools for riscv64-gc-unknown-linux-gnu so this test has now been noticed to be a problem.
Cleanup dll/exe filename calculations in `run_make_support`
Use `std::env::consts` constants since now we have access to them (unlike in Makefiles!) ^^
cc `@bzEq` (this is one of the places in our test suites that tries to compute e.g. dylib extension; using `std::env::consts::DLL_EXTENSION` should correctly return `a` for AIX)
r? `@fmease` (thank you for the suggestion in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/127760#discussion_r1678079698, this also improves correctness for the support library!)
try-job: aarch64-apple
try-job: armhf-gnu
try-job: test-various
try-job: x86_64-msvc
try-job: x86_64-gnu-llvm-18
interpret: add sanity check in dyn upcast to double-check what codegen does
For dyn receiver calls, we already have two codepaths: look up the function to call by indexing into the vtable, or alternatively resolve the DefId given the dynamic type of the receiver. With debug assertions enabled, the interpreter does both and compares the results. (Without debug assertions we always use the vtable as it is simpler.)
This PR does the same for dyn trait upcasts. However, for casts *not* using the vtable is the easier thing to do, so now the vtable path is the debug-assertion-only path. In particular, there are cases where the vtable does not contain a pointer for upcasts but instead reuses the old pointer: when the supertrait vtable is a prefix of the larger vtable. We don't want to expose this optimization and detect UB if people do a transmute assuming this optimization, so we cannot in general use the vtable indexing path.
r? ``@oli-obk``
Add `isqrt` to `NonZero<uN>`
Implements [#70887 (comment)](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116226#issuecomment-2144225174), with the following signature:
```rust
impl NonZero<uN> {
const fn isqrt(self) -> Self;
}
```
Unintended benefits include one fewer panicking branch in `ilog2` for LLVM to optimize away, and one fewer `assume_unchecked` as `NonZero` already does that.
The fast path for `self == 1` is dropped, but the current implementation is very slow anyways compared to hardware. Performance improvements can always come later.
(I didn't add the function to `NonZero<iN>`, since _every_ existing `NonZero` method is non-panicking, and it might be nice to leave it that way.)
This commit updates the support for the `wasm-component-ld` tool
from #126967 to conditionally build it rather than unconditionally
building it when LLD is enabled. This support is disabled by default and
can be enabled by one of two means:
* the `extended` field in `config.toml` which dist builders use to build
a complete set of tools for each host platform.
* a `"wasm-component-ld"` entry in the `tools` section of `config.toml`.
Neither of these are enabled by default meaning that most local builds
will likely not have this new tool built. Dist builders should still,
however, build the tool.
Apache NuttX is a real-time operating system (RTOS) with an emphasis on standards compliance and small footprint. It is scalable from 8-bit to 64-bit microcontroller environments. The primary governing standards in NuttX are POSIX and ANSI standards.
NuttX adopts additional standard APIs from Unix and other common RTOSs, such as VxWorks. These APIs are used for functionality not available under the POSIX and ANSI standards. However, some APIs, like fork(), are not appropriate for deeply-embedded environments and are not implemented in NuttX.
For brevity, many parts of the documentation will refer to Apache NuttX as simply NuttX.
I'll be adding libstd support for NuttX in the future, but for now I'll just add the targets.
Tier 3 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.)
I will be the target maintainer for this target on matters that pertain to the NuttX part of the triple.
For matters pertaining to the riscv or arm part of the triple, there should be no difference from all other targets. If there are issues, I will address issues regarding the target.
> 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.
This is a new supported OS, so I have taken the origin target like `riscv32imac-unknown-none-elf` or `thumbv7m-none-eabi`
and changed the `os` section to `nuttx`.
> 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.
I feel that the target name does not introduce any ambiguity.
> 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 only unusual requirement for building the compiler-builtins crate is a standard RISC-V or ARM C compiler supported by cc-rs, and using this target does not require any additional software beyond what is shipped by rustup.
> The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
All of the additional code will use Apache-2.0.
> Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust
> license (`MIT OR Apache-2.0`).
Agreed, and there is no problem here.
> 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.
No new dependencies are added.
> 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.
Linking is performed by rust-lld
> "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.
There are no terms. NuttX is distributed under the Apache 2.0 license.
> 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.
I'm not the reviewer here.
> 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.
Again I'm not the reviewer here.
> 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.
> 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 platform support doc, but libstd is not supported now,
I'll implement it later.
> 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.
Understood.
> 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.
I believe I didn't break any other 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 think there are no such problems in this PR.
> 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.)
Yes, it use standard RISCV or ARM backend to generate assembly.
Signed-off-by: Huang Qi <huangqi3@xiaomi.com>
- Update system table crc32
- Fix unsound use of Box
- Free exit data
- Code improvements
- Introduce OwnedTable
- Update r-efi to latest version
- Use extended_varargs_abi_support for
install_multiple_protocol_interfaces and
uninstall_multiple_protocol_interfaces
- Fix comments
- Stub out args implementation
Signed-off-by: Ayush Singh <ayushdevel1325@gmail.com>
