| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Co-authored-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
|
|
https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#supported-constraint-code-list
|
|
implement rfc-2528 type_changing-struct-update
This PR implement rfc2528-type_changing-struct-update.
The main change process is as follows:
1. Move the processing part of `base_expr` into `check_expr_struct_fields` to avoid returning `remaining_fields` (a relatively complex hash table)
2. Before performing the type consistency check(`check_expr_has_type_or_error`), if the `type_changing_struct_update` feature is set, enter a different processing flow, otherwise keep the original flow
3. In the case of the same structure definition, check each field in `remaining_fields`. If the field in `base_expr` is not the suptype of the field in `adt_ty`, an error(`FeildMisMatch`) will be reported.
The MIR part does not need to be changed, because only the items contained in `remaining_fields` will be extracted from `base_expr` when MIR is generated. This means that fields with different types in `base_expr` will not be used
Updates #86618
cc `@nikomatsakis`
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add features gates for experimental asm features
This PR splits off parts of `asm!` into separate features because they are not ready for stabilization.
Specifically this adds:
- `asm_const` for `const` operands.
- `asm_sym` for `sym` operands.
- `asm_experimental_arch` for architectures other than x86, x86_64, arm, aarch64 and riscv.
r? `@nagisa`
|
|
|
|
Add a chapter on reading Rustdoc output
Includes documentation for:
- general page structure
- navigation
- searching
- themes
- deep-linking
Doesn't include docs on the settings page.
Per https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90309
|
|
|
|
Includes documentation for:
- general page structure
- navigation
- searching
- themes
- deep-linking
Doesn't include docs on the settings page.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Co-authored-by: Yuki Okushi <jtitor@2k36.org>
|
|
I removed one of them because it doesn't seem necessary.
|
|
This should prevent future failures like this one [1].
[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/runs/4067460927?check_suite_focus=true
|
|
Co-authored-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
|
|
Since rustc doesn't do the assembly parsing itself, it is unable
to detect when inline assembly ends with an instruction prefix,
which doesn't make sense since it would apply to instructions from
the compiler. This fixes #82314 by mentioning that x86 instruction
prefixes must not be used in inline assembly.
|
|
|
|
Make printed message match the code comment
I think this code is getting L0, not L1 cache size, if I'm reading the Intel manual right. (I might not be.) Either way, the code comment and the printed message should match, whichever way is right. :)
|
|
|
|
Use paragraphs instead of bullet-points.
Edits throughout for clarity.
Use semantic line breaks in edited sections.
Co-authored-by: Joshua Nelson <github@jyn.dev>
|
|
|
|
Explain that target-specific documentation should appear in a
subdirectory of platform-support, with a link from the target's entry on
the platform-support page.
|
|
The requirement for target documentation talks about "running tests",
but tier 3 targets often don't support running the full testsuite, and
in practice the documentation for how to run an individual binary may be
more useful. Change "running tests" to "running binaries, or running
tests".
|
|
The requirement on dependencies was phrased in terms of "host tools",
but it was also intended to apply equally to targets that only support
cross-compilation. Only the exception (for libraries commonly needed for
binaries on the target) was intended to apply to host tools. Reword the
requirement to talk about the dependencies required for "compiling,
linking,and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other code for
the target", rather than generically in terms of dependencies for
rustc/cargo.
This doesn't change the net effect of the requirements, since other
requirements already stated that the target can't make the Rust
toolchain depend on proprietary libraries. However, this should make the
requirements clearer.
|
|
Several times, people have seemed unclear on how to respond to some of
the policy requirements, particularly those that just state things the
target developers must *not* do (e.g. not posting to PRs that break the
target). Add a note that such requirements just need acknowledgement,
nothing more.
Make quoting and responding a "must" rather than an "is encouraged to",
since it's easier to review the requirements that way.
|
|
Document `doc(keyword)` unstable attribute
r? `@camelid`
|
|
Add new tier 3 target: `x86_64-unknown-none`
Adds support for compiling OS kernels or other bare-metal applications for the x86-64 architecture.
Below are details on how this target meets the requirements for tier 3:
> A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target. (The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
I would be willing to be a target maintainer, though I would appreciate if others volunteered to help with that as well.
> Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust (such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important even for a tier 3 target.
Uses the same naming as the LLVM target, and the same convention as many other bare-metal targets.
> Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to disambiguate it.
I don't believe there is any ambiguity here.
> Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for Rust developers or users.
I don't see any legal issues here.
> The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
> Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license (MIT OR Apache-2.0).
> The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding new license exceptions (as specified by the tidy tool in the rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be subject to any new license requirements.
>If the target supports building host tools (such as rustc or cargo), those host tools must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries, other than ordinary runtime libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other binaries built for the target. For instance, rustc built for the target may depend on a common proprietary C runtime library or console output library, but must not depend on a proprietary code generation library or code optimization library. Rust's license permits such combinations, but the Rust project has no interest in maintaining such combinations within the scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
> Targets should not require proprietary (non-FOSS) components to link a functional binary or library.
> "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous" legal/licensing terms include but are not limited to: non-disclosure requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements (CLAs) or equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms, requirements conditional on the employer or employment of any particular Rust developers, revocable terms, any requirements that create liability for the Rust project or its developers or users, or any requirements that adversely affect the livelihood or prospects of the Rust project or its developers or users.
I see no issues with any of the above.
> Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise participate in discussions.
> This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being cited in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or maintain support for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a developer or team responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not face any legal threats or obligations that would prevent them from freely exercising their judgment in such approval, even if such judgment involves subjective matters or goes beyond the letter of these requirements.
Only relevant to those making approval decisions.
> Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets that can support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3 target not implementing those portions.
`core` and `alloc` can be used. `std` cannot be used as this is a bare-metal target.
> The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target supports running tests (even if they do not pass), the documentation must explain how to run tests for the target, using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
Use `--target=x86_64-unknown-none-elf` option to cross compile, just like any target. The target does not support running tests.
> Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or other developers in the community, to maintain the target. In particular, do not post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a block on the PR based on a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or notifications (via any medium, including via `@)` to a PR author or others involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
> Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested such notifications.
I don't foresee this being a problem.
> Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2 or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3 target.
> In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets, such as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the target may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as appropriate, to let each target run code supported by that target.
No other targets should be affected by the pull request.
|
|
|
|
Unify titles in rustdoc book doc attributes chapter
As discussed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/90339.
I wasn't able to find out where the link to the titles was used so let's see if the CI fails. :)
r? ``@camelid``
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fix minor typos
|
|
This is work toward #1241.
|
|
Co-authored-by: Yuki Okushi <jtitor@2k36.org>
Co-authored-by: nhamovitz <18648574+nhamovitz@users.noreply.github.com>
|
|
Add missing documentation for doc alias
|
|
|
|
put the test dir in test/ui/rfcs
|
|
This commit adds initial documentation for LLVM Control Flow Integrity
(CFI) support to the Rust compiler (see rust-lang/rust#89652 and
rust-lang/rust#89653).
|
|
Add LLVM CFI support to the Rust compiler
This PR adds LLVM Control Flow Integrity (CFI) support to the Rust compiler. It initially provides forward-edge control flow protection for Rust-compiled code only by aggregating function pointers in groups identified by their number of arguments.
Forward-edge control flow protection for C or C++ and Rust -compiled code "mixed binaries" (i.e., for when C or C++ and Rust -compiled code share the same virtual address space) will be provided in later work as part of this project by defining and using compatible type identifiers (see Type metadata in the design document in the tracking issue #89653).
LLVM CFI can be enabled with -Zsanitizer=cfi and requires LTO (i.e., -Clto).
Thank you, `@eddyb` and `@pcc,` for all the help!
|
|
This commit adds initial documentation for LLVM Control Flow Integrity
(CFI) support to the Rust compiler (see #89652 and #89653).
|
|
|
|
Add -Z no-unique-section-names to reduce ELF header bloat.
This change adds a new compiler flag that can help reduce the size of ELF binaries that contain many functions.
By default, when enabling function sections (which is the default for most targets), the LLVM backend will generate different section names for each function. For example, a function `func` would generate a section called `.text.func`. Normally this is fine because the linker will merge all those sections into a single one in the binary. However, starting with [LLVM 12](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/ee5d1a04), the backend will also generate unique section names for exception handling, resulting in thousands of `.gcc_except_table.*` sections ending up in the final binary because some linkers like LLD don't currently merge or strip these EH sections (see discussion [here](https://reviews.llvm.org/D83655)). This can bloat the ELF headers and string table significantly in binaries that contain many functions.
The new option is analogous to Clang's `-fno-unique-section-names`, and instructs LLVM to generate the same `.text` and `.gcc_except_table` section for each function, resulting in a smaller final binary.
The motivation to add this new option was because we have a binary that ended up with so many ELF sections (over 65,000) that it broke some existing ELF tools, which couldn't handle so many sections.
Here's our old binary:
```
$ readelf --sections old.elf | head -1
There are 71746 section headers, starting at offset 0x2a246508:
$ readelf --sections old.elf | grep shstrtab
[71742] .shstrtab STRTAB 0000000000000000 2977204c ad44bb 00 0 0 1
```
That's an 11MB+ string table. Here's the new binary using this option:
```
$ readelf --sections new.elf | head -1
There are 43 section headers, starting at offset 0x29143ca8:
$ readelf --sections new.elf | grep shstrtab
[40] .shstrtab STRTAB 0000000000000000 29143acc 0001db 00 0 0 1
```
The whole binary size went down by over 20MB, which is quite significant.
|
|
Both style-check and date-check are now on the 2021 edition, and this
commit also updates their repositories' submodules.
|
|
Scrape code examples from examples/ directory for Rustdoc
Adds support for the functionality described in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3123
Matching changes to Cargo are here: https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/9525
Live demo here: https://willcrichton.net/example-analyzer/warp/trait.Filter.html#method.and
|
|
Implement -Z location-detail flag
This PR implements the `-Z location-detail` flag as described in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2091 .
`-Z location-detail=val` controls what location details are tracked when using `caller_location`. This allows users to control what location details are printed as part of panic messages, by allowing them to exclude any combination of filenames, line numbers, and column numbers. This option is intended to provide users with a way to mitigate the size impact of `#[track_caller]`.
Some measurements of the savings of this approach on an embedded binary can be found here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/70579#issuecomment-942556822 .
Closes #70580 (unless people want to leave that open as a place for discussion of further improvements).
This is my first real PR to rust, so any help correcting mistakes / understanding side effects / improving my tests is appreciated :)
I have one question: RFC 2091 specified this as a debugging option (I think that is what -Z implies?). Does that mean this can never be stabilized without a separate MCP? If so, do I need to submit an MCP now, or is the initial RFC specifying this option sufficient for this to be merged as is, and then an MCP would be needed for eventual stabilization?
|
|
scrape-examples options
|
|
|
|
No migrations were necessary.
|
|
|
