compiler: gate `extern "{abi}"` in ast_lowering
I don't believe low-level crates like `rustc_abi` should have to know or care about higher-level concerns like whether the ABI string is stable for users. These implementation details can be made less open to public inspection. This way the code that governs stability is near the code that enforces stability, and compiled together.
It also abstracts away certain error messages instead of constantly repeating them.
A few error messages are simply deleted outright, instead of made uniform, because they are either too dated to be useful or redundant with other diagnostic improvements we could make. These can be pursued in followups: my first concern was making sure there wasn't unnecessary diagnostics-related code in `rustc_abi`, which is not well-positioned to understand what kind of errors are going to be generated based on how it is used.
r? ``@ghost``
adding autodiff tests
I'd like to get started with upstreaming some tests, even though I'm still waiting for an answer on how to best integrate the enzyme pass. Can we therefore temporarily support the -Z llvm-plugins here without too much effort? And in that case, how would that work? I saw you can do remapping, e.g. `rust-src-base`, but I don't think that will give me the path to libEnzyme.so. Do you have another suggestion?
Other than that this test simply checks that the derivative of `x*x` is `2.0 * x`, which in this case is computed as
`%0 = fadd fast double %x.0.val, %x.0.val`
(I'll add a few more tests and move it to an autodiff folder if we can use the -Z flag)
r? ``@jieyouxu``
Locally at least `-Zllvm-plugins=${PWD}/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/enzyme/build/Enzyme/libEnzyme-19.so` seems to work if I copy the command I get from x.py test and run it manually. However, running x.py test itself fails.
Tracking:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/124509
Zulip discussion: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/326414-t-infra.2Fbootstrap/topic/Enzyme.20build.20changes
Adds `#[rustc_force_inline]` which is similar to always inlining but
reports an error if the inlining was not possible, and which always
attempts to inline annotated items, regardless of optimisation levels.
It can only be applied to free functions to guarantee that the MIR
inliner will be able to resolve calls.
`rustc_span::symbol` defines some things that are re-exported from
`rustc_span`, such as `Symbol` and `sym`. But it doesn't re-export some
closely related things such as `Ident` and `kw`. So you can do `use
rustc_span::{Symbol, sym}` but you have to do `use
rustc_span::symbol::{Ident, kw}`, which is inconsistent for no good
reason.
This commit re-exports `Ident`, `kw`, and `MacroRulesNormalizedIdent`,
and changes many `rustc_span::symbol::` qualifiers in `compiler/` to
`rustc_span::`. This is a 200+ net line of code reduction, mostly
because many files with two `use rustc_span` items can be reduced to
one.
Add some convenience helper methods on `hir::Safety`
Makes a lot of call sites simpler and should make any refactorings needed for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/134090#issuecomment-2541332415 simpler, as fewer sites have to be touched in case we end up storing some information in the variants of `hir::Safety`
codegen `#[naked]` functions using global asm
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90957Fixes#124375
This implements the approach suggested in the tracking issue: use the existing global assembly infrastructure to emit the body of `#[naked]` functions. The main advantage is that we now have full control over what gets generated, and are no longer dependent on LLVM not sneakily messing with our output (inlining, adding extra instructions, etc).
I discussed this approach with `@Amanieu` and while I think the general direction is correct, there is probably a bunch of stuff that needs to change or move around here. I'll leave some inline comments on things that I'm not sure about.
Combined with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/127853, if both accepted, I think that resolves all steps from the tracking issue.
r? `@Amanieu`
Lint on combining `#[no_mangle]` and `#[export_name]`
This is my very first contribution to the compiler, even though I read the [chapter about lints](https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/diagnostics.html) I'm not very certain that this ~~new lint is done right as a builtin lint~~ PR is right. I appreciate any guidance on how to improve the code.
- Add test for issue #47446
- ~~Implement the new lint `mixed_export_name_and_no_mangle` as a builtin lint (not sure if that is the right way to go)~~ Extend `unused_attributes` lint
- Add suggestion how to fix it
<details>
<summary>Old proposed new lint</summary>
> The `mixed_export_name_and_no_mangle` lint detects usage of both `#[export_name]` and `#[no_mangle]` on the same item which results on `#[no_mangle]` being ignored.
>
> *warn-by-default*
>
> ### Example
>
> ```rust
> #[no_mangle] // ignored
> #[export_name = "foo"] // takes precedences
> pub fn bar() {}
> ```
>
> ### Explanation
>
> The compiler will not respect the `#[no_mangle]` attribute when generating the symbol name for the function, as the `#[export_name]` attribute takes precedence. This can lead to confusion and is unnecessary.
</details>
mark some target features as 'forbidden' so they cannot be (un)set with -Ctarget-feature
The context for this is https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116344: some target features change the way floats are passed between functions. Changing those target features is unsound as code compiled for the same target may now use different ABIs.
So this introduces a new concept of "forbidden" target features (on top of the existing "stable " and "unstable" categories), and makes it a hard error to (un)set such a target feature. For now, the x86 and ARM feature `soft-float` is on that list. We'll have to make some effort to collect more relevant features, and similar features from other targets, but that can happen after the basic infrastructure for this landed. (These features are being collected in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131799.)
I've made this a warning for now to give people some time to speak up if this would break something.
MCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/780
codegen_ssa: consolidate tied target checks
Fixes#105110.
Fixes#105111.
`rustc_codegen_llvm` and `rustc_codegen_gcc` duplicated logic for checking if tied target features were partially enabled. This PR consolidates these checks into `rustc_codegen_ssa` in the `codegen_fn_attrs` query, which also is run pre-monomorphisation for each function, which ensures that this check is run for unused functions, as would be expected.
Also adds a test confirming that enabling one tied feature doesn't imply another - the appropriate error for this was already being emitted. I did a bisect and narrowed it down to two patches it was likely to be - something in #128796, probably #128221 or #128679.
`rustc_codegen_llvm` and `rustc_codegen_gcc` duplicated logic for
checking if tied target features were partially enabled. This commit
consolidates these checks into `rustc_codegen_ssa` in the
`codegen_fn_attrs` query, which also is run pre-monomorphisation for
each function, which ensures that this check is run for unused functions,
as would be expected.
Clean up a few minor refs in `format!` macro, as it has a performance cost. Apparently the compiler is unable to inline `format!("{}", &variable)`, and does a run-time double-reference instead (format macro already does one level referencing). Inlining format args prevents accidental `&` misuse.
patchable-function-entry: Add unstable compiler flag and attribute
Tracking issue: #123115
Add the -Z patchable-function-entry compiler flag and the #[patchable_function_entry(prefix_nops = m, entry_nops = n)] attribute.
Rebased and adjusted the canditate implementation to match changes in the RFC.
[perf] Delay the construction of early lint diag structs
Attacks some of the perf regressions from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124417#issuecomment-2123700666.
See individual commits for details. The first three commits are not strictly necessary.
However, the 2nd one (06bc4fc671, *Remove `LintDiagnostic::msg`*) makes the main change way nicer to implement.
It's also pretty sweet on its own if I may say so myself.
