| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Add gpu-kernel calling convention
The amdgpu-kernel calling convention was reverted in commit f6b21e90d1ec01081bc2619efb68af6788a63d65 (#120495 and https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/pull/16463) due to inactivity in the amdgpu target.
Introduce a `gpu-kernel` calling convention that translates to `ptx_kernel` or `amdgpu_kernel`, depending on the target that rust compiles for.
Tracking issue: #135467
amdgpu target tracking issue: #135024
|
|
The amdgpu-kernel calling convention was reverted in commit
f6b21e90d1ec01081bc2619efb68af6788a63d65 due to inactivity in the amdgpu
target.
Introduce a `gpu-kernel` calling convention that translates to
`ptx_kernel` or `amdgpu_kernel`, depending on the target that rust
compiles for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
previously field ordering was using the same seed for all instances of Foo,
now we pass seed values through the layout tree so that not only
the struct itself affects layout but also its fields
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
`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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
distinguish overflow and unimplemented in Step::steps_between
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Add `LayoutS::is_uninhabited` and use it
Use accessors for the things that accessors are good at: reducing everyone's need to be nosy and peek at the internals of every data structure.
|
|
This reduces the need of the compiler to peek on the fields of LayoutS.
|
|
The last {UninternedType}S is in captivity. The galaxy is at peace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This finally unites TyAndLayout, Layout, and LayoutS into the same crate,
as one might imagine they would be placed. No functional changes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Correct outdated object size limit
The comment here about 48 bit addresses being enough was written in 2016 but was made incorrect in 2019 by 5-level paging, and then persisted for another 5 years before being noticed and corrected.
The bolding of the "exclusive" part is merely to call attention to something I missed when reading it and doublechecking the math.
try-job: i686-msvc
try-job: test-various
|
|
Co-authored-by: Ralf Jung <post@ralfj.de>
|
|
no need for a weird macro when a self-explanatory `match` will do.
|
|
The comment here about 48 bit addresses being enough was written in 2016
but was made incorrect in 2019 by 5-level paging, and then persisted for
another 5 years before being noticed and corrected.
|
|
|
|
For structs that cannot be unsized, the layout algorithm sometimes moves
unsized fields to the end of the struct, which circumvented the error
for unexpected unsized fields and returned an unsized layout anyway.
This commit makes it so that the unexpected unsized error is always
returned for structs that cannot be unsized, allowing us to remove an
old hack and fixing some old ICE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It requires no additonal changes to these crates, but will prevent
unnecessary `pub`s in the future.
|
|
|
|
The previous commit updated `rustfmt.toml` appropriately. This commit is
the outcome of running `x fmt --all` with the new formatting options.
|
|
Don't use implicit features in `Cargo.toml` in `compiler/`
Fixes compiler crates to stop using implicit features (https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/12826) which are denied in in edition 2024.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disable dead variant removal for `#[repr(C)]` enums.
This prevents removing dead branches from a `#[repr(C)]` enum (they now get discriminants allocated as if they were inhabited).
Implementation notes: ABI of something like
```rust
#[repr(C)]
enum Foo {
Foo(!),
}
```
is still `Uninhabited`, but its layout is now computed as if all the branches were inhabited.
This seemed to me like a proper way to do it, especially given that ABI sanity check explicitly asserts that type-level uninhabitedness implies ABI uninhabitedness.
This probably needs some sort of FCP (given that it changes `#[repr(C)]` layout, which is a stable guarantee), but I’m not sure how to call for one or which team is the most relevant.
See https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/500.
|
|
See https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/500.
|
|
Un-unsafe the `StableOrd` trait
Whilst incorrect implementations of this trait can cause miscompilation, they cannot cause memory unsafety in rustc.
[Discussed on Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/182449-t-compiler.2Fhelp/topic/Policy.20of.20.60unsafe.60.20within.20the.20compiler).
cc [MCP 533](https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/533), #105175, `@michaelwoerister`
r? `@Nilstrieb`
|
|
Added an associated `const THIS_IMPLEMENTATION_HAS_BEEN_TRIPLE_CHECKED`
to the `StableOrd` trait to ensure that implementors carefully consider
whether the trait's contract is upheld, as incorrect implementations can
cause miscompilations.
|
|
Whilst incorrect implementations of this trait can cause miscompilation,
they cannot cause memory unsafety in rustc.
|
|
We already do this for a number of crates, e.g. `rustc_middle`,
`rustc_span`, `rustc_metadata`, `rustc_span`, `rustc_errors`.
For the ones we don't, in many cases the attributes are a mess.
- There is no consistency about order of attribute kinds (e.g.
`allow`/`deny`/`feature`).
- Within attribute kind groups (e.g. the `feature` attributes),
sometimes the order is alphabetical, and sometimes there is no
particular order.
- Sometimes the attributes of a particular kind aren't even grouped
all together, e.g. there might be a `feature`, then an `allow`, then
another `feature`.
This commit extends the existing sorting to all compiler crates,
increasing consistency. If any new attribute line is added there is now
only one place it can go -- no need for arbitrary decisions.
Exceptions:
- `rustc_log`, `rustc_next_trait_solver` and `rustc_type_ir_macros`,
because they have no crate attributes.
- `rustc_codegen_gcc`, because it's quasi-external to rustc (e.g. it's
ignored in `rustfmt.toml`).
|
|
|
