Get rid of `predicates_defined_on`
This is the uncontroversial part of #129532. This simply inlines the `predicates_defined_on` into into `predicates_of`. Nothing should change here logically.
Stop storing a special inner body for the coroutine by-move body for async closures
...and instead, just synthesize an item which is treated mostly normally by the MIR pipeline.
This PR does a few things:
* We synthesize a new `DefId` for the by-move body of a closure, which has its `mir_built` fed with the output of the `ByMoveBody` MIR transformation, and some other relevant queries.
* This has the `DefKind::ByMoveBody`, which we use to distinguish it from "real" bodies (that come from HIR) which need to be borrowck'd. Introduce `TyCtxt::is_synthetic_mir` to skip over `mir_borrowck` which is called by `mir_promoted`; borrowck isn't really possible to make work ATM since it heavily relies being called on a body generated from HIR, and is redundant by the construction of the by-move-body.
* Remove the special `PassManager` hacks for handling the inner `by_move_body` stored within the coroutine's mir body. Instead, this body is fed like a regular MIR body, so it's goes through all of the `tcx.*_mir` stages normally (build -> promoted -> ...etc... -> optimized) ✨.
* Remove the `InstanceKind::ByMoveBody` shim, since now we have a "regular" def id, we can just use `InstanceKind::Item`. This also allows us to remove the corresponding hacks from codegen, such as in `fn_sig_for_fn_abi` ✨.
Notable remarks:
* ~~I know it's kind of weird to be using `DefKind::Closure` here, since it's not a distinct closure but just a new MIR body. I don't believe it really matters, but I could also use a different `DefKind`... maybe one that we could use for synthetic MIR bodies in general?~~ edit: We're doing this now.
The main `arbitrary_self_types` feature gate will shortly be reused for
a new version of arbitrary self types which we are amending per [this
RFC](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/3519-arbitrary-self-types-v2.md).
The main amendments are:
* _do_ support `self` types which can't safely implement `Deref`
* do _not_ support generic `self` types
* do _not_ support raw pointers as `self` types.
This PR relates to the last of those bullet points: this strips pointer
support from the current `arbitrary_self_types` feature.
We expect this to cause some amount of breakage for crates using this
unstable feature to allow raw pointer self types. If that's the case, we
want to know about it, and we want crate authors to know of the upcoming
changes.
For now, this can be resolved by adding the new
`arbitrary_self_types_pointers` feature to such crates. If we determine
that use of raw pointers as self types is common, then we may maintain
that as an unstable feature even if we come to stabilize the rest of the
`arbitrary_self_types` support in future. If we don't hear that this PR
is causing breakage, then perhaps we don't need it at all, even behind
an unstable feature gate.
[Tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44874)
This is [step 4 of the plan outlined here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44874#issuecomment-2122179688)
make it possible to enable const_precise_live_drops per-function
This makes const_precise_live_drops work with rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable so that we can stabilize individual functions that rely on const_precise_live_drops.
The goal is that we can use that to stabilize some of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/67441 without having to stabilize const_precise_live_drops.
As our implementation of MCP411 nears completion and we begin to
solicit testing, it's no longer reasonable to expect testers to
type or remember `BikeshedIntrinsicFrom`. The name degrades the
ease-of-reading of documentation, and the overall experience of
using compiler safe transmute.
Tentatively, we'll instead adopt `TransmuteFrom`.
This name seems to be the one most likely to be stabilized, after
discussion on Zulip [1]. We may want to revisit the ordering of
`Src` and `Dst` before stabilization, at which point we'd likely
consider `TransmuteInto` or `Transmute`.
[1] https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/216762-project-safe-transmute/topic/What.20should.20.60BikeshedIntrinsicFrom.60.20be.20named.3F
Add various aarch64 features already supported by LLVM and Linux.
The features are marked as unstable using a newly added symbol, i.e.
aarch64_unstable_target_feature.
Additionally include some comment fixes to ensure consistency of
feature names with the Arm ARM and support for architecture version
target features up to v9.5a.
This commit adds compiler support for the following features:
- FEAT_CSSC
- FEAT_ECV
- FEAT_FAMINMAX
- FEAT_FLAGM2
- FEAT_FP8
- FEAT_FP8DOT2
- FEAT_FP8DOT4
- FEAT_FP8FMA
- FEAT_FPMR
- FEAT_HBC
- FEAT_LSE128
- FEAT_LSE2
- FEAT_LUT
- FEAT_MOPS
- FEAT_LRCPC3
- FEAT_SVE_B16B16
- FEAT_SVE2p1
- FEAT_WFxT
Add `f16` and `f128` inline ASM support for `aarch64`
Adds `f16` and `f128` inline ASM support for `aarch64`. SIMD vector types are taken from [the ARM intrinsics list](https://developer.arm.com/architectures/instruction-sets/intrinsics/#f:`@navigationhierarchiesreturnbasetype=[float]&f:@navigationhierarchieselementbitsize=[16]&f:@navigationhierarchiesarchitectures=[A64]).` Based on the work of `@lengrongfu` in #127043.
Relevant issue: #125398
Tracking issue: #116909
`@rustbot` label +F-f16_and_f128
try-job: aarch64-gnu
try-job: aarch64-apple
Add Trusty OS as tier 3 target
This PR adds support for the [Trusty secure operating system](https://source.android.com/docs/security/features/trusty) as a Tier 3 supported target. This upstreams [the patch that we have been using](https://cs.android.com/android/platform/superproject/+/master:external/rust/crates/libc/patches/trusty.patch;l=1;drc=122e586e93a534160230dc10ae3474cf31dd8f7f) internally. This also revives https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/103895 which was closed due to inactivity, and is being resumed now that time allows.
And MCP has already been done for adding this platform: rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/568
# Target Tier Policy Acknowledgements
> 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.)
- Nicole LeGare (``@randomPoison)``
- Stephen Crane (``@rinon)``
- As a fallback trusty-dev-team@google.com can be contacted
> 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.
The two new Trusty targets, `aarch64-unknown-trusty` and `armv7-unknown-trusty` both follow the existing naming convention for similar targets.
> 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.
👍
> 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.
There are no known legal issues or license incompatibilities.
> 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.
👍
> 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.
This PR only adds the targets for the platform. `std` support will be added once platform support is added to the libc crate, which depends on the language targets being added to rustc.
> 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.
👍
> 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.
👍
> 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.
👍
> 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.)
👍
More work on `zstd` compression
r? ``@Kobzol`` as we've discussed this.
This is a draft to show the current approach of supporting zstd in compiletest, and making the tests using it unconditional.
Knowing whether llvm/lld was built with `LLVM_ENABLE_ZSTD` is quite hard, so there are two strategies. There are details in the code, and we can discuss this approach. Until we know the config used to build CI artifacts, it seems our options are somewhat limited in any case.
zlib compression seems always enabled, so we only check this in its dedicated test, allowing the test to ignore errors due to zstd not being supported.
The zstd test is made unconditional in what it tests, by relying on `needs-llvm-zstd` to be ignored when `llvm.libzstd` isn't enabled in `config.toml`.
try-job: x86_64-gnu
try-job: x86_64-msvc
try-job: x86_64-gnu-distcheck
simd_shuffle intrinsic: allow argument to be passed as vector
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/128738 for context.
I'd like to get rid of [this hack](6c0b89dfac/compiler/rustc_codegen_ssa/src/mir/block.rs (L922-L935)). https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/128537 almost lets us do that since constant SIMD vectors will then be passed as immediate arguments. However, simd_shuffle for some reason actually takes an *array* as argument, not a vector, so the hack is still required to ensure that the array becomes an immediate (which then later stages of codegen convert into a vector, as that's what LLVM needs).
This PR prepares simd_shuffle to also support a vector as the `idx` argument. Once this lands, stdarch can hopefully be updated to pass `idx` as a vector, and then support for arrays can be removed, which finally lets us get rid of that hack.
Remove Duplicate E0381 Label
Aims to resolve https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/129274, and adds a test for the case.
Essentially, we are duplicating this span for some reason. For now, I'm just using a set to collect the spans rather than the vec. I imagine there's probably no real reason to inspect duplicates in this area, but if I'm wrong I can adjust to collect "seen spans" in just the point where this label is applied.
I'm not sure why it's producing duplicate spans. Looks like this has been this way for a while? I think it gives the duplicate label on 1.75.0 for example.
Do not ICE on non-ADT rcvr type when looking for crate version collision
When looking for multiple versions of the same crate, do not blindly construct the receiver type.
Follow up to #128786.
Fixes#129205Fixes#129216
Document & implement the transmutation modeled by `BikeshedIntrinsicFrom`
Documents that `BikeshedIntrinsicFrom` models transmute-via-union, which is slightly more expressive than the transmute-via-cast implemented by `transmute_copy`. Additionally, we provide an implementation of transmute-via-union as a method on the `BikeshedIntrinsicFrom` trait with additional documentation on the boundary between trait invariants and caller obligations.
Whether or not transmute-via-union is the right kind of transmute to model remains up for discussion [1]. Regardless, it seems wise to document the present behavior.
[1] 426331967
Tracking Issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/99571
r? `@compiler-errors`
cc `@scottmcm,` `@Lokathor`
Tie `impl_trait_overcaptures` lint to Rust 2024
The `impl_trait_overcaptures` lint is part of the migration to Rust 2024 and the Lifetime Capture Rules 2024. Now that we've stabilized precise capturing (RFC 3617), let's tie this lint to the `rust_2024_compatibility` lint group.
Tracking:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/117587
r? `@compiler-errors`
Without suitable `needs-llvm-components` directives, these tests that
rely on target-specific codegen can fail if used with a LLVM that is
built without the required components.
The `impl_trait_overcaptures` lint is part of the migration to Rust
2024 and the Lifetime Capture Rules 2024. Now that we've stabilized
precise capturing (RFC 3617), let's tie this lint to the
`rust_2024_compatibility` lint group.
add back test for stable-const-can-only-call-stable-const
This got accidentally removed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/128596 (file `tests/ui/internal/internal-unstable-const.rs`). The test has little to do with "allow internal unstable" though, so add it in a file that already tests various const stability things.
Also tweak the help that suggests to add `rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable` to make it clear that this needs team approval, since it is a fairly big gun.
rustdoc: clean up tuple <-> primitive conversion docs
This adds a minor missing feature to `fake_variadic`, so that it can render `impl From<(T,)> for [T; 1]` correctly.
Remove redundant flags from `lower_ty_common` that can be inferred from the HIR
...and then get rid of `lower_ty_common`.
r? ``@fmease`` or re-roll if you're busy!
Use subtyping for `UnsafeFnPointer` coercion, too
I overlooked this in #129059, which changed MIR typechecking to use subtyping for other fn pointer coercions.
Fixes#129285
