| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
subtree-update_cg_gcc_2025-06-28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
subtree-update_cg_gcc_2025-06-18
|
|
Change __rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable to be a function
This fixes a long sequence of issues:
1. A customer reported that building for Arm64EC was broken: #138541
2. This was caused by a bug in my original implementation of Arm64EC support, namely that only functions on Arm64EC need to be decorated with `#` but Rust was decorating statics as well.
3. Once I corrected Rust to only decorate functions, I started linking failures where the linker couldn't find statics exported by dylib dependencies. This was caused by the compiler not marking exported statics in the generated DEF file with `DATA`, thus they were being exported as functions not data.
4. Once I corrected the way that the DEF files were being emitted, the linker started failing saying that it couldn't find `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable`. This is because the MSVC linker requires the declarations of statics imported from other dylibs to be marked with `dllimport` (whereas it will happily link to functions imported from other dylibs whether they are marked `dllimport` or not).
5. I then made a change to ensure that `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` was marked as `dllimport`, but the MSVC linker started emitting warnings that `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` was marked as `dllimport` but was declared in an obj file. This is a harmless warning which is a performance hint: anything that's marked `dllimport` must be indirected via an `__imp` symbol so I added a linker arg in the target to suppress the warning.
6. A customer then reported a similar warning when using `lld-link` (<https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/140176#issuecomment-2872448443>). I don't think it was an implementation difference between the two linkers but rather that, depending on the obj that the declaration versus uses of `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` landed in we would get different warnings, so I suppressed that warning as well: #140954.
7. Another customer reported that they weren't using the Rust compiler to invoke the linker, thus these warnings were breaking their build: <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/140176#issuecomment-2881867433>. At that point, my original change was reverted (#141024) leaving Arm64EC broken yet again.
Taking a step back, a lot of these linker issues arise from the fact that `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` is marked as `extern "Rust"` in the standard library and, therefore, assumed to be a foreign item from a different crate BUT the Rust compiler may choose to generate it either in the current crate, some other crate that will be statically linked in OR some other crate that will by dynamically imported.
Worse yet, it is impossible while building a given crate to know if `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` will statically linked or dynamically imported: it might be that one of its dependent crates is the one with an allocator kind set and thus that crate (which is compiled later) will decide depending if it has any dylib dependencies or not to import `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` or generate it. Thus, there is no way to know if the declaration of `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` should be marked with `dllimport` or not.
There is a simple fix for all this: there is no reason `__rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable` must be a static. It needs to be some symbol that must be linked in; thus, it could easily be a function instead. As a function, there is no need to mark it as `dllimport` when dynamically imported which avoids the entire mess above.
There may be a perf hit for changing the `volatile load` to be a `tail call`, so I'm happy to change that part back (although I question what the codegen of a `volatile load` would look like, and if the backend is going to try to use load-acquire semantics).
Build with this change applied BEFORE #140176 was reverted to demonstrate that there are no linking issues with either MSVC or MinGW: <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/actions/runs/15078657205>
Incidentally, I fixed `tests/run-make/no-alloc-shim` to work with MSVC as I needed it to be able to test locally (FYI for #128602)
r? `@bjorn3`
cc `@jieyouxu`
|
|
|
|
|
|
r=workingjubilee,saethlin
Move metadata object generation for dylibs to the linker code
This deduplicates some code between codegen backends and may in the future allow adding extra metadata that is only known at link time.
Prerequisite of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/96708.
|
|
Remove wasm legacy abi
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/122532
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138762
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/71871
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/88152
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/115666
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/129486
|
|
Simplify implementation of Rust intrinsics by using type parameters in the cache
The current implementation of intrinsics have a lot of duplication to handle different overloads of overloaded LLVM intrinsic. This PR uses the **base name and the type parameters** in the cache instead of the full, overloaded name. This has the benefit that `call_intrinsic` doesn't need to provide the full name, rather the type parameters (which is most of the time more available). This uses `LLVMIntrinsicCopyOverloadedName2` to get the overloaded name from the base name and the type parameters, and only uses it to declare the function.
(originally was part of rust-lang/rust#140763, split off later)
`@rustbot` label A-codegen A-LLVM
r? codegen
|
|
|
|
add `extern "custom"` functions
tracking issue: rust-lang/rust#140829
previous discussion: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/140566
In short, an `extern "custom"` function is a function with a custom ABI, that rust does not know about. Therefore, such functions can only be defined with `#[unsafe(naked)]` and `naked_asm!`, or via an `extern "C" { /* ... */ }` block. These functions cannot be called using normal rust syntax: calling them can only be done from inline assembly.
The motivation is low-level scenarios where a custom calling convention is used. Currently, we often pick `extern "C"`, but that is a lie because the function does not actually respect the C calling convention.
At the moment `"custom"` seems to be the name with the most support. That name is not final, but we need to pick something to actually implement this.
r? `@traviscross`
cc `@tgross35`
try-job: x86_64-apple-2
|
|
|
|
|
|
enable retpoline-related target features
|
|
Remove all unused feature gates from the compiler
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replace ad-hoc ABI "adjustments" with an `AbiMap` to `CanonAbi`
Our `conv_from_spec_abi`, `adjust_abi`, and `is_abi_supported` combine to give us a very confusing way of reasoning about what _actual_ calling convention we want to lower our code to and whether we want to compile the resulting code at all. Instead of leaving this code as a miniature adventure game in which someone tries to combine stateful mutations into a Rube Goldberg machine that will let them escape the maze and arrive at the promised land of codegen, we let `AbiMap` devour this complexity. Once you have an `AbiMap`, you can answer which `ExternAbi`s will lower to what `CanonAbi`s (and whether they will lower at all).
Removed:
- `conv_from_spec_abi` replaced by `AbiMap::canonize_abi`
- `adjust_abi` replaced by same
- `Conv::PreserveAll` as unused
- `Conv::Cold` as unused
- `enum Conv` replaced by `enum CanonAbi`
target-spec.json changes:
- If you have a target-spec.json then now your "entry-abi" key will be specified in terms of one of the `"{abi}"` strings Rust recognizes, e.g.
```json
"entry-abi": "C",
"entry-abi": "win64",
"entry-abi": "aapcs",
```
|
|
|
|
This deduplicates some code between codegen backends and may in the
future allow adding extra metadata that is only known at link time.
|
|
And move passing it to the linker to the driver code.
|
|
It is only used within cg_llvm.
|
|
It is only used within cg_llvm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This avoids having to get the function signature.
|
|
atomic_load intrinsic: use const generic parameter for ordering
We have a gazillion intrinsics for the atomics because we encode the ordering into the intrinsic name rather than making it a parameter. This is particularly bad for those operations that take two orderings. Let's fix that!
This PR only converts `load`, to see if there's any feedback that would fundamentally change the strategy we pursue for the const generic intrinsics.
The first two commits are preparation and could be a separate PR if you prefer.
`@BoxyUwU` -- I hope this is a use of const generics that is unlikely to explode? All we need is a const generic of enum type. We could funnel it through an integer if we had to but an enum is obviously nicer...
`@bjorn3` it seems like the cranelift backend entirely ignores the ordering?
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no safety contract and I don't think any of them can actually
cause UB in more ways than passing malicious source code to rustc can.
While LtoModuleCodegen::optimize says that the returned ModuleCodegen
points into the LTO module, the LTO module has already been dropped by
the time this function returns, so if the returned ModuleCodegen indeed
points into the LTO module, we would have seen crashes on every LTO
compilation, which we don't. As such the comment is outdated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Rename `USED` to `USED_COMPILER` to better reflect its behavior.
- Reorder some items to group the used and allocator flags together
- Renumber them without gaps
|
|
make `rustc_attr_parsing` less dominant in the rustc crate graph
It has/had a glob re-export of `rustc_attr_data_structures`, which is a crate much lower in the graph, and a lot of crates were using it *just* (or *mostly*) for that re-export, while they can rely on `rustc_attr_data_structures` directly.
Previous graph:
Graph with this PR:
The first commit keeps the re-export, and just changes the dependency if possible. The second commit is the "breaking change" which removes the re-export, and "explicitly" adds the `rustc_attr_data_structures` dependency where needed. It also switches over some src/tools/*.
The second commit is actually a lot more involved than I expected. Please let me know if it's a better idea to back it out and just keep the first commit.
|
|
|
|
subtree-update_cg_gcc_2025-05-14
|
