about summary refs log tree commit diff
path: root/src/dlmalloc
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorLines
2018-12-11std: Depend directly on crates.io cratesAlex Crichton-0/+0
Ever since we added a Cargo-based build system for the compiler the standard library has always been a little special, it's never been able to depend on crates.io crates for runtime dependencies. This has been a result of various limitations, namely that Cargo doesn't understand that crates from crates.io depend on libcore, so Cargo tries to build crates before libcore is finished. I had an idea this afternoon, however, which lifts the strategy from #52919 to directly depend on crates.io crates from the standard library. After all is said and done this removes a whopping three submodules that we need to manage! The basic idea here is that for any crate `std` depends on it adds an *optional* dependency on an empty crate on crates.io, in this case named `rustc-std-workspace-core`. This crate is overridden via `[patch]` in this repository to point to a local crate we write, and *that* has a `path` dependency on libcore. Note that all `no_std` crates also depend on `compiler_builtins`, but if we're not using submodules we can publish `compiler_builtins` to crates.io and all crates can depend on it anyway! The basic strategy then looks like: * The standard library (or some transitive dep) decides to depend on a crate `foo`. * The standard library adds ```toml [dependencies] foo = { version = "0.1", features = ['rustc-dep-of-std'] } ``` * The crate `foo` has an optional dependency on `rustc-std-workspace-core` * The crate `foo` has an optional dependency on `compiler_builtins` * The crate `foo` has a feature `rustc-dep-of-std` which activates these crates and any other necessary infrastructure in the crate. A sample commit for `dlmalloc` [turns out to be quite simple][commit]. After that all `no_std` crates should largely build "as is" and still be publishable on crates.io! Notably they should be able to continue to use stable Rust if necessary, since the `rename-dependency` feature of Cargo is soon stabilizing. As a proof of concept, this commit removes the `dlmalloc`, `libcompiler_builtins`, and `libc` submodules from this repository. Long thorns in our side these are now gone for good and we can directly depend on crates.io! It's hoped that in the long term we can bring in other crates as necessary, but for now this is largely intended to simply make it easier to manage these crates and remove submodules. This should be a transparent non-breaking change for all users, but one possible stickler is that this almost for sure breaks out-of-tree `std`-building tools like `xargo` and `cargo-xbuild`. I think it should be relatively easy to get them working, however, as all that's needed is an entry in the `[patch]` section used to build the standard library. Hopefully we can work with these tools to solve this problem! [commit]: https://github.com/alexcrichton/dlmalloc-rs/commit/28ee12db813a3b650a7c25d1c36d2c17dcb88ae3
2018-12-07Add x86_64-fortanix-unknown-sgx target to libstd and dependenciesJethro Beekman-0/+0
The files src/libstd/sys/sgx/*.rs are mostly copied/adapted from the wasm target. This also updates the dlmalloc submodule to the very latest version.
2018-04-12Update to most recent version of dlmallocAlex Crichton-0/+0
Inline the definition of `GlobalAlloc` for `dlmalloc` on wasm and don't rely on usage of unstable features in `dlmalloc` itself.
2018-02-10Update the dlmalloc submoduleAlex Crichton-0/+0
A bug was recently fixed in dlmalloc which meant that released memory to the system accidentally wasn't getting reused, causing programs to be far slower than they should be!
2018-02-09rustc: Upgrade to LLVM 6Alex Crichton-0/+0
The following submodules have been updated for a new version of LLVM: - `src/llvm` - `src/libcompiler_builtins` - transitively contains compiler-rt - `src/dlmalloc` This also updates the docker container for dist-i686-freebsd as the old 16.04 container is no longer capable of building LLVM. The compiler-rt/compiler-builtins and dlmalloc updates are pretty routine without much interesting happening, but the LLVM update here is of particular note. Unlike previous updates I haven't cherry-picked all existing patches we had on top of our LLVM branch as we have a [huge amount][patches4] and have at this point forgotten what most of them are for. Instead I started from the current `release_60` branch in LLVM and only applied patches that were necessary to get our tests working and building. The current set of custom rustc-specific patches included in this LLVM update are: * rust-lang/llvm@1187443 - this is how we actually implement `cfg(target_feature)` for now and continues to not be upstreamed. While a hazard for SIMD stabilization this commit is otherwise keeping the status quo of a small rustc-specific feature. * rust-lang/llvm@013f2ec - this is a rustc-specific optimization that we haven't upstreamed, notably teaching LLVM about our allocation-related routines (which aren't malloc/free). Once we stabilize the global allocator routines we will likely want to upstream this patch, but for now it seems reasonable to keep it on our fork. * rust-lang/llvm@a65bbfd - I found this necessary to fix compilation of LLVM in our 32-bit linux container. I'm not really sure why it's necessary but my guess is that it's because of the absolutely ancient glibc that we're using. In any case it's only updating pieces we're not actually using in LLVM so I'm hoping it'll turn out alright. This doesn't seem like something we'll want to upstream.c * rust-lang/llvm@77ab1f0 - this is what's actually enabling LLVM to build in our i686-freebsd container, I'm not really sure what's going on but we for sure probably don't want to upstream this and otherwise it seems not too bad for now at least. * rust-lang/llvm@9eb9267 - we currently suffer on MSVC from an [upstream bug] which although diagnosed to a particular revision isn't currently fixed upstream (and the bug itself doesn't seem too active). This commit is a partial revert of the suspected cause of this regression (found via a bisection). I'm sort of hoping that this eventually gets fixed upstream with a similar fix (which we can replace in our branch), but for now I'm also hoping it's a relatively harmless change to have. After applying these patches (plus one [backport] which should be [backported upstream][llvm-back]) I believe we should have all tests working on all platforms in our current test suite. I'm like 99% sure that we'll need some more backports as issues are reported for LLVM 6 when this propagates through nightlies, but that's sort of just par for the course nowadays! In any case though some extra scrutiny of the patches here would definitely be welcome, along with scrutiny of the "missing patches" like a [change to pass manager order](rust-lang/llvm@27174447533), [another change to pass manager order](rust-lang/llvm@c782febb7b9), some [compile fixes for sparc](rust-lang/llvm@1a83de63c42), and some [fixes for solaris](rust-lang/llvm@c2bfe0abb). [patches4]: https://github.com/rust-lang/llvm/compare/5401fdf23...rust-llvm-release-4-0-1 [backport]: https://github.com/rust-lang/llvm/commit/5c54c252db [llvm-back]: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36114 [upstream bug]: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36096 --- The update to LLVM 6 is desirable for a number of reasons, notably: * This'll allow us to keep up with the upstream wasm backend, picking up new features as they start landing. * Upstream LLVM has fixed a number of SIMD-related compilation errors, especially around AVX-512 and such. * There's a few assorted known bugs which are fixed in LLVM 5 and aren't fixed in the LLVM 4 branch we're using. * Overall it's not a great idea to stagnate with our codegen backend! This update is mostly powered by #47730 which is allowing us to update LLVM *independent* of the version of LLVM that Emscripten is locked to. This means that when compiling code for Emscripten we'll still be using the old LLVM 4 backend, but when compiling code for any other target we'll be using the new LLVM 6 target. Once Emscripten updates we may no longer need this distinction, but we're not sure when that will happen! Closes #43370 Closes #43418 Closes #47015 Closes #47683 Closes rust-lang-nursery/stdsimd#157 Closes rust-lang-nursery/rust-wasm#3
2017-11-19std: Add a new wasm32-unknown-unknown targetAlex Crichton-0/+0
This commit adds a new target to the compiler: wasm32-unknown-unknown. This target is a reimagining of what it looks like to generate WebAssembly code from Rust. Instead of using Emscripten which can bring with it a weighty runtime this instead is a target which uses only the LLVM backend for WebAssembly and a "custom linker" for now which will hopefully one day be direct calls to lld. Notable features of this target include: * There is zero runtime footprint. The target assumes nothing exists other than the wasm32 instruction set. * There is zero toolchain footprint beyond adding the target. No custom linker is needed, rustc contains everything. * Very small wasm modules can be generated directly from Rust code using this target. * Most of the standard library is stubbed out to return an error, but anything related to allocation works (aka `HashMap`, `Vec`, etc). * Naturally, any `#[no_std]` crate should be 100% compatible with this new target. This target is currently somewhat janky due to how linking works. The "linking" is currently unconditional whole program LTO (aka LLVM is being used as a linker). Naturally that means compiling programs is pretty slow! Eventually though this target should have a linker. This target is also intended to be quite experimental. I'm hoping that this can act as a catalyst for further experimentation in Rust with WebAssembly. Breaking changes are very likely to land to this target, so it's not recommended to rely on it in any critical capacity yet. We'll let you know when it's "production ready". --- Currently testing-wise this target is looking pretty good but isn't complete. I've got almost the entire `run-pass` test suite working with this target (lots of tests ignored, but many passing as well). The `core` test suite is still getting LLVM bugs fixed to get that working and will take some time. Relatively simple programs all seem to work though! --- It's worth nothing that you may not immediately see the "smallest possible wasm module" for the input you feed to rustc. For various reasons it's very difficult to get rid of the final "bloat" in vanilla rustc (again, a real linker should fix all this). For now what you'll have to do is: cargo install --git https://github.com/alexcrichton/wasm-gc wasm-gc foo.wasm bar.wasm And then `bar.wasm` should be the smallest we can get it! --- In any case for now I'd love feedback on this, particularly on the various integration points if you've got better ideas of how to approach them!