Pass through of target features to llvm-bitcode-linker and handling them
When using the llvm-bitcode-linker (`linker-flavor=llbc`) target-features are not passed through and are not handled by it.
The llvm-bitcode-linker is mainly used as a self contained linker to link llvm bitcode for the nvptx64 target. It uses `llvm-link`, `opt` and `llc` internally. To produce a `.ptx` file of a specific ptx-version it is necessary to pass the version to llc with the `--mattr` option. Without explicitly setting it, the emitted `.ptx`-version is the minimum supported version of the `--target-cpu`.
I would like to be able to explicitly set the ptx version as [some llvm problems only occur in earlier `.ptx`-versions](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/112998).
Therefore this pull request adds support for passing target features to llvm-bitcode-linker and handling them.
I was not quite sure if adding these features to `rustc_target/src/target_features.rs` is necessary or not. If so I will gladly add these.
r? ``@kjetilkjeka``
- For shifts this shrinks the IR by no longer needing an `assume` while still providing the UB information
- Having this on the `i8`→`i1` truncations will hopefully help with some places that have to load `i8`s or pass those in LLVM structs without range information
Bitcode linkers like llvm-bitcode-linker or bpf linker hand over the target features to llvm during link stage. During link stage the `TyCtxt` is already gone so it is not possible to create a query for the global backend features any longer. The features preserved in `Session.target_features` only incorporate target features known to rustc. This would contradict with the behaviour during codegen stage which also passes target features to llvm which are unknown to rustc.
This commit adds target features as a field to the `CrateInfo` struct and queries the target features in its new function. This way the target features are preserved beyond tcx and available at link stage.
To make sure the `global_backend_features` query is always registered even if the CodegenBackend does not register it, this registration is added to the `provide`function of the `rustc_codegen_ssa` crate.
Autodiff Upstreaming - rustc_codegen_ssa, rustc_middle
This PR should not be merged until the rustc_codegen_llvm part is merged.
I will also alter it a little based on what get's shaved off from the cg_llvm PR,
and address some of the feedback I received in the other PR (including cleanups).
I am putting it already up to
1) Discuss with `@jieyouxu` if there is more work needed to add tests to this and
2) Pray that there is someone reviewing who can tell me why some of my autodiff invocations get lost.
Re 1: My test require fat-lto. I also modify the compilation pipeline. So if there are any other llvm-ir tests in the same compilation unit then I will likely break them. Luckily there are two groups who currently have the same fat-lto requirement for their GPU code which I have for my autodiff code and both groups have some plans to enable support for thin-lto. Once either that work pans out, I'll copy it over for this feature. I will also work on not changing the optimization pipeline for functions not differentiated, but that will require some thoughts and engineering, so I think it would be good to be able to run the autodiff tests isolated from the rest for now. Can you guide me here please?
For context, here are some of my tests in the samples folder: https://github.com/EnzymeAD/rustbook
Re 2: This is a pretty serious issue, since it effectively prevents publishing libraries making use of autodiff: https://github.com/EnzymeAD/rust/issues/173. For some reason my dummy code persists till the end, so the code which calls autodiff, deletes the dummy, and inserts the code to compute the derivative never gets executed. To me it looks like the rustc_autodiff attribute just get's dropped, but I don't know WHY? Any help would be super appreciated, as rustc queries look a bit voodoo to me.
Tracking:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/124509
r? `@jieyouxu`
Fix deduplication mismatches in vtables leading to upcasting unsoundness
We currently have two cases where subtleties in supertraits can trigger disagreements in the vtable layout, e.g. leading to a different vtable layout being accessed at a callsite compared to what was prepared during unsizing. Namely:
### #135315
In this example, we were not normalizing supertraits when preparing vtables. In the example,
```
trait Supertrait<T> {
fn _print_numbers(&self, mem: &[usize; 100]) {
println!("{mem:?}");
}
}
impl<T> Supertrait<T> for () {}
trait Identity {
type Selff;
}
impl<Selff> Identity for Selff {
type Selff = Selff;
}
trait Middle<T>: Supertrait<()> + Supertrait<T> {
fn say_hello(&self, _: &usize) {
println!("Hello!");
}
}
impl<T> Middle<T> for () {}
trait Trait: Middle<<() as Identity>::Selff> {}
impl Trait for () {}
fn main() {
(&() as &dyn Trait as &dyn Middle<()>).say_hello(&0);
}
```
When we prepare `dyn Trait`, we see a supertrait of `Middle<<() as Identity>::Selff>`, which itself has two supertraits `Supertrait<()>` and `Supertrait<<() as Identity>::Selff>`. These two supertraits are identical, but they are not duplicated because we were using structural equality and *not* considering normalization. This leads to a vtable layout with two trait pointers.
When we upcast to `dyn Middle<()>`, those two supertraits are now the same, leading to a vtable layout with only one trait pointer. This leads to an offset error, and we call the wrong method.
### #135316
This one is a bit more interesting, and is the bulk of the changes in this PR. It's a bit similar, except it uses binder equality instead of normalization to make the compiler get confused about two vtable layouts. In the example,
```
trait Supertrait<T> {
fn _print_numbers(&self, mem: &[usize; 100]) {
println!("{mem:?}");
}
}
impl<T> Supertrait<T> for () {}
trait Trait<T, U>: Supertrait<T> + Supertrait<U> {
fn say_hello(&self, _: &usize) {
println!("Hello!");
}
}
impl<T, U> Trait<T, U> for () {}
fn main() {
(&() as &'static dyn for<'a> Trait<&'static (), &'a ()>
as &'static dyn Trait<&'static (), &'static ()>)
.say_hello(&0);
}
```
When we prepare the vtable for `dyn for<'a> Trait<&'static (), &'a ()>`, we currently consider the PolyTraitRef of the vtable as the key for a supertrait. This leads two two supertraits -- `Supertrait<&'static ()>` and `for<'a> Supertrait<&'a ()>`.
However, we can upcast[^up] without offsetting the vtable from `dyn for<'a> Trait<&'static (), &'a ()>` to `dyn Trait<&'static (), &'static ()>`. This is just instantiating the principal trait ref for a specific `'a = 'static`. However, when considering those supertraits, we now have only one distinct supertrait -- `Supertrait<&'static ()>` (which is deduplicated since there are two supertraits with the same substitutions). This leads to similar offsetting issues, leading to the wrong method being called.
[^up]: I say upcast but this is a cast that is allowed on stable, since it's not changing the vtable at all, just instantiating the binder of the principal trait ref for some lifetime.
The solution here is to recognize that a vtable isn't really meaningfully higher ranked, and to just treat a vtable as corresponding to a `TraitRef` so we can do this deduplication more faithfully. That is to say, the vtable for `dyn for<'a> Tr<'a>` and `dyn Tr<'x>` are always identical, since they both would correspond to a set of free regions on an impl... Do note that `Tr<for<'a> fn(&'a ())>` and `Tr<fn(&'static ())>` are still distinct.
----
There's a bit more that can be cleaned up. In codegen, we can stop using `PolyExistentialTraitRef` basically everywhere. We can also fix SMIR to stop storing `PolyExistentialTraitRef` in its vtable allocations.
As for testing, it's difficult to actually turn this into something that can be tested with `rustc_dump_vtable`, since having multiple supertraits that are identical is a recipe for ambiguity errors. Maybe someone else is more creative with getting that attr to work, since the tests I added being run-pass tests is a bit unsatisfying. Miri also doesn't help here, since it doesn't really generate vtables that are offset by an index in the same way as codegen.
r? `@lcnr` for the vibe check? Or reassign, idk. Maybe let's talk about whether this makes sense.
<sup>(I guess an alternative would also be to not do any deduplication of vtable supertraits (or only a really conservative subset) rather than trying to normalize and deduplicate more faithfully here. Not sure if that works and is sufficient tho.)</sup>
cc `@steffahn` -- ty for the minimizations
cc `@WaffleLapkin` -- since you're overseeing the feature stabilization :3
Fixes#135315Fixes#135316
Target option to require explicit cpu
Some targets have many different CPUs and no generic CPU that can be used as a default. For these targets, the user needs to explicitly specify a CPU through `-C target-cpu=`.
Add an option for targets and an error message if no CPU is set.
This affects the proposed amdgpu and avr targets.
amdgpu tracking issue: #135024
AVR MCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/800
Some targets have many different CPUs and no generic CPU that can be
used as a default. For these targets, the user needs to explicitly
specify a CPU through `-C target-cpu=`.
Add an option for targets and an error message if no CPU is set.
This affects the proposed amdgpu and avr targets.
`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.
the behavior of the type system not only depends on the current
assumptions, but also the currentnphase of the compiler. This is
mostly necessary as we need to decide whether and how to reveal
opaque types. We track this via the `TypingMode`.
Fix: ices on virtual-function-elimination about principal trait
Extract `load_vtable` function to ensure the `virtual_function_elimination` option is always checked.
It's okay not to use `llvm.type.checked.load` to load the vtable if there is no principal trait.
Fixes#123955Fixes#124092
Somehow these files aren't properly formatted. By default `x fmt` and `x
tidy` only check files that have changed against master, so if an
ill-formatted file somehow slips in it can stay that way as long as it
doesn't get modified(?)
I found these when I ran `x fmt` explicitly on every `.rs` file in the
repo, while working on
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/750.
Remove more `#[macro_use] extern crate tracing`
Because explicit importing of macros via use items is nicer (more standard and readable) than implicit importing via `#[macro_use]`. Continuing the work from #124511 and #124914.
r? `@jackh726`
