summary refs log tree commit diff
path: root/compiler/rustc_abi/src/layout
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorLines
2025-03-08Move coroutine layout logic to `rustc_abi`Moulins-0/+320
2025-03-08Move SIMD layout logic to `rustc_abi`Moulins-0/+6
2025-03-08Remove most manual LayoutData creations and move them to `rustc_abi`Moulins-0/+148
...either as: - methods on LayoutCalculator, for faillible operations; - constructors on LayoutData, for infaillible ones.
2025-02-28rename BackendRepr::Vector → SimdVectorRalf Jung-1/+1
2025-02-06compiler: reorganize rustc_abi to be more internally uniformJubilee Young-4/+8
General housekeeping: - Use less reexports from its rustc_target era - Unify some imports as a result - Split the Reg(ister) types into their own files Generally moving stuff around because it makes the crate more consistent.
2024-11-14Support s390x z13 vector ABITaiki Endo-0/+18
2024-10-29compiler: `rustc_abi::Abi` => `BackendRepr`Jubilee Young-6/+6
The initial naming of "Abi" was an awful mistake, conveying wrong ideas about how psABIs worked and even more about what the enum meant. It was only meant to represent the way the value would be described to a codegen backend as it was lowered to that intermediate representation. It was never meant to mean anything about the actual psABI handling! The conflation is because LLVM typically will associate a certain form with a certain ABI, but even that does not hold when the special cases that actually exist arise, plus the IR annotations that modify the ABI. Reframe `rustc_abi::Abi` as the `BackendRepr` of the type, and rename `BackendRepr::Aggregate` as `BackendRepr::Memory`. Unfortunately, due to the persistent misunderstandings, this too is now incorrect: - Scattered ABI-relevant code is entangled with BackendRepr - We do not always pre-compute a correct BackendRepr that reflects how we "actually" want this value to be handled, so we leave the backend interface to also inject various special-cases here - In some cases `BackendRepr::Memory` is a "real" aggregate, but in others it is in fact using memory, and in some cases it is a scalar! Our rustc-to-backend lowering code handles this sort of thing right now. That will eventually be addressed by lifting duplicated lowering code to either rustc_codegen_ssa or rustc_target as appropriate.
2024-10-27compiler: Rename LayoutS to LayoutDataJubilee Young-5/+5
The last {UninternedType}S is in captivity. The galaxy is at peace.
2024-10-11compiler: Wire `{TyAnd,}Layout` into `rustc_abi`Jubilee Young-3/+1
This finally unites TyAndLayout, Layout, and LayoutS into the same crate, as one might imagine they would be placed. No functional changes.
2024-10-11compiler: Empty out rustc_target::abiJubilee Young-0/+269