The embedded bitcode should always be prepared for LTO/ThinLTO
Fixes#115344. Fixes#117220.
There are currently two methods for generating bitcode that used for LTO. One method involves using `-C linker-plugin-lto` to emit object files as bitcode, which is the typical setting used by cargo. The other method is through `-C embed-bitcode=yes`.
When using with `-C embed-bitcode=yes -C lto=no`, we run a complete non-LTO LLVM pipeline to obtain bitcode, then the bitcode is used for LTO. We run the Call Graph Profile Pass twice on the same module.
This PR is doing something similar to LLVM's `buildFatLTODefaultPipeline`, obtaining the bitcode for embedding after running `buildThinLTOPreLinkDefaultPipeline`.
r? nikic
Make it so that every structured error annotated with `#[derive(Diagnostic)]` that has a field of type `Ty<'_>`, the printing of that value into a `String` will look at the thread-local storage `TyCtxt` in order to shorten to a length appropriate with the terminal width. When this happen, the resulting error will have a note with the file where the full type name was written to.
```
error[E0618]: expected function, found `((..., ..., ..., ...), ..., ..., ...)``
--> long.rs:7:5
|
6 | fn foo(x: D) { //~ `x` has type `(...
| - `x` has type `((..., ..., ..., ...), ..., ..., ...)`
7 | x(); //~ ERROR expected function, found `(...
| ^--
| |
| call expression requires function
|
= note: the full name for the type has been written to 'long.long-type-14182675702747116984.txt'
= note: consider using `--verbose` to print the full type name to the console
```
Target modifiers (special marked options) are recorded in metainfo
Target modifiers (special marked options) are recorded in metainfo and compared to be equal in different linked crates.
PR for this RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3716
Option may be marked as `TARGET_MODIFIER`, example: `regparm: Option<u32> = (None, parse_opt_number, [TRACKED TARGET_MODIFIER]`.
If an TARGET_MODIFIER-marked option has non-default value, it will be recorded in crate metainfo as a `Vec<TargetModifier>`:
```
pub struct TargetModifier {
pub opt: OptionsTargetModifiers,
pub value_name: String,
}
```
OptionsTargetModifiers is a macro-generated enum.
Option value code (for comparison) is generated using `Debug` trait.
Error example:
```
error: mixing `-Zregparm` will cause an ABI mismatch in crate `incompatible_regparm`
--> $DIR/incompatible_regparm.rs:10:1
|
LL | #![crate_type = "lib"]
| ^
|
= help: the `-Zregparm` flag modifies the ABI so Rust crates compiled with different values of this flag cannot be used together safely
= note: `-Zregparm=1` in this crate is incompatible with `-Zregparm=2` in dependency `wrong_regparm`
= help: set `-Zregparm=2` in this crate or `-Zregparm=1` in `wrong_regparm`
= help: if you are sure this will not cause problems, use `-Cunsafe-allow-abi-mismatch=regparm` to silence this error
error: aborting due to 1 previous error
```
`-Cunsafe-allow-abi-mismatch=regparm,reg-struct-return` to disable list of flags.
remove support for the (unstable) #[start] attribute
As explained by `@Noratrieb:`
`#[start]` should be deleted. It's nothing but an accidentally leaked implementation detail that's a not very useful mix between "portable" entrypoint logic and bad abstraction.
I think the way the stable user-facing entrypoint should work (and works today on stable) is pretty simple:
- `std`-using cross-platform programs should use `fn main()`. the compiler, together with `std`, will then ensure that code ends up at `main` (by having a platform-specific entrypoint that gets directed through `lang_start` in `std` to `main` - but that's just an implementation detail)
- `no_std` platform-specific programs should use `#![no_main]` and define their own platform-specific entrypoint symbol with `#[no_mangle]`, like `main`, `_start`, `WinMain` or `my_embedded_platform_wants_to_start_here`. most of them only support a single platform anyways, and need cfg for the different platform's ways of passing arguments or other things *anyways*
`#[start]` is in a super weird position of being neither of those two. It tries to pretend that it's cross-platform, but its signature is a total lie. Those arguments are just stubbed out to zero on ~~Windows~~ wasm, for example. It also only handles the platform-specific entrypoints for a few platforms that are supported by `std`, like Windows or Unix-likes. `my_embedded_platform_wants_to_start_here` can't use it, and neither could a libc-less Linux program.
So we have an attribute that only works in some cases anyways, that has a signature that's a total lie (and a signature that, as I might want to add, has changed recently, and that I definitely would not be comfortable giving *any* stability guarantees on), and where there's a pretty easy way to get things working without it in the first place.
Note that this feature has **not** been RFCed in the first place.
*This comment was posted [in May](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29633#issuecomment-2088596042) and so far nobody spoke up in that issue with a usecase that would require keeping the attribute.*
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29633
try-job: x86_64-gnu-nopt
try-job: x86_64-msvc-1
try-job: x86_64-msvc-2
try-job: test-various
Rename FileName::QuoteExpansion to CfgSpec
I believe this variant name was used incorrectly. The timeline is roughly:
* `FileName::cfg_spec_source_code` was added in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/54517. However, it used `FileName::Quote` instead of `FileName::CfgSpec` which I believe was a mistake.
* Quote stuff was removed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/51285, but did not remove `FileName::Quote`.
* `FileName::CfgSpec` was removed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116474 because it was unused.
This restores it so that the `--cfg` variant uses a name that makes more sense with how it is used, and restores what I think is the original intent.
I believe this variant name was used incorrectly. The timeline is roughly:
* `FileName::cfg_spec_source_code` was added in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/54517. However, it used
`FileName::Quote` instead of `FileName::CfgSpec` which I believe was a
mistake.
* Quote stuff was removed in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/51285, but did not remove
`FileName::Quote`.
* `FileName::CfgSpec` was removed in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116474 because it was unused.
This restores it so that the `--cfg` variant uses a name that makes more
sense with how it is used, and restores what I think is the original
intent.
add `-Zmin-function-alignment`
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82232
This PR adds the `-Zmin-function-alignment=<align>` flag, that specifies a minimum alignment for all* functions.
### Motivation
This feature is requested by RfL [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/128830):
> i.e. the equivalents of `-fmin-function-alignment` ([GCC](https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#index-fmin-function-alignment_003dn), Clang does not support it) / `-falign-functions` ([GCC](https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#index-falign-functions), [Clang](https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ClangCommandLineReference.html#cmdoption-clang1-falign-functions)).
>
> For the Linux kernel, the behavior wanted is that of GCC's `-fmin-function-alignment` and Clang's `-falign-functions`, i.e. align all functions, including cold functions.
>
> There is [`feature(fn_align)`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82232), but we need to do it globally.
### Behavior
The `fn_align` feature does not have an RFC. It was decided at the time that it would not be necessary, but maybe we feel differently about that now? In any case, here are the semantics of this flag:
- `-Zmin-function-alignment=<align>` specifies the minimum alignment of all* functions
- the `#[repr(align(<align>))]` attribute can be used to override the function alignment on a per-function basis: when `-Zmin-function-alignment` is specified, the attribute's value is only used when it is higher than the value passed to `-Zmin-function-alignment`.
- the target may decide to use a higher value (e.g. on x86_64 the minimum that LLVM generates is 16)
- The highest supported alignment in rust is `2^29`: I checked a bunch of targets, and they all emit the `.p2align 29` directive for targets that align functions at all (some GPU stuff does not have function alignment).
*: Only with `build-std` would the minimum alignment also be applied to `std` functions.
---
cc `@ojeda`
r? `@workingjubilee` you were active on the tracking issue
Stop pessimizing the use of local variables in core by skipping debug info for MIR temporaries in tiny (single-BB) functions.
For functions as simple as this -- `Pin::new`, etc -- nobody every actually wants debuginfo for them in the first place. They're more like intrinsics than real functions, and stepping over them is good.
I was surprised to find that running with `-Zparse-only` only parses the
crate root file. Other files aren't parsed because that happens later
during expansion.
This commit renames the option and updates the help message to make this
clearer.
Remove the `wasm32-wasi` target from rustc
This commit is the final step in the journey of renaming the historical `wasm32-wasi` target in the Rust compiler to `wasm32-wasip1`. Various steps in this journey so far have been:
* 2023-04-03: rust-lang/compiler-team#607 - initial proposal for this rename
* 2024-11-27: rust-lang/compiler-team#695 - amended schedule/procedure for rename
* 2024-01-29: rust-lang/rust#120468 - initial introduction of `wasm32-wasip1`
* 2024-06-18: rust-lang/rust#126662 - warn on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2024-11-08: this PR - remove the `wasm32-wasi` target
The full transition schedule is in [this comment][comment] and is summarized with:
* 2024-05-02: Rust 1.78 released with `wasm32-wasip1` target
* 2024-09-05: Rust 1.81 released warning on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2025-01-09: Rust 1.84 to be released without the `wasm32-wasi` target
This means that support on stable for the replacement target of `wasm32-wasip1` has currently been available for 6 months. Users have already seen warnings on stable for 2 months about usage of `wasm32-wasi` and stable users have another 2 months of warnings before the target is removed from stable.
This commit is intended to be the final step in this transition so the source tree should no longer mention `wasm32-wasi` except in historical reference to the older name of the `wasm32-wasip1` target.
[comment]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120468#issuecomment-1977878747
rustc_codegen_llvm: Add a new 'pc' option to branch-protection
Add a new 'pc' option to -Z branch-protection for aarch64 that enables the use of PC as a diversifier in PAC branch protection code.
When the pauth-lr target feature is enabled in combination with -Z branch-protection=pac-ret,pc, the new 9.5-a instructions (pacibsppc, retaasppc, etc) will be generated.
This commit is the final step in the journey of renaming the historical
`wasm32-wasi` target in the Rust compiler to `wasm32-wasip1`. Various
steps in this journey so far have been:
* 2023-04-03: rust-lang/compiler-team#607 - initial proposal for this rename
* 2024-11-27: rust-lang/compiler-team#695 - amended schedule/procedure for rename
* 2024-01-29: rust-lang/rust#120468 - initial introduction of `wasm32-wasip1`
* 2024-06-18: rust-lang/rust#126662 - warn on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2024-11-08: this PR - remove the `wasm32-wasi` target
The full transition schedule is in [this comment][comment] and is
summarized with:
* 2024-05-02: Rust 1.78 released with `wasm32-wasip1` target
* 2024-09-05: Rust 1.81 released warning on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2025-01-09: Rust 1.84 to be released without the `wasm32-wasi` target
This means that support on stable for the replacement target of
`wasm32-wasip1` has currently been available for 6 months. Users have
already seen warnings on stable for 2 months about usage of
`wasm32-wasi` and stable users have another 2 months of warnings before
the target is removed from stable.
This commit is intended to be the final step in this transition so the
source tree should no longer mention `wasm32-wasi` except in historical
reference to the older name of the `wasm32-wasip1` target.
[comment]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120468#issuecomment-1977878747
