| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|
|
|
Elide object safety errors on non-existent trait function
Fix #58734.
r? @zackmdavis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fix #58734.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teach `-Z treat-err-as-bug` to take a number of errors to emit
`-Z treat-err-as-bug` will cause `rustc` to panic after the first error is reported, like previously. `-Z treat-err-as-bug=2` will cause `rustc` to panic after 2 errors have been reported.
Fix #58983.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
`-Z treat-err-as-bug=0` will cause `rustc` to panic after the first
error is reported. `-Z treat-err-as-bug=2` will cause `rustc` to
panic after 3 errors have been reported.
|
|
proc macro to execute them
|
|
Related to #58372
|
|
This will allow us to send it across threads and measure things like
LLVM time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
rustc: Implement incremental "fat" LTO
Currently the compiler will produce an error if both incremental
compilation and full fat LTO is requested. With recent changes and the
advent of incremental ThinLTO, however, all the hard work is already
done for us and it's actually not too bad to remove this error!
This commit updates the codegen backend to allow incremental full fat
LTO. The semantics are that the input modules to LTO are all produce
incrementally, but the final LTO step is always done unconditionally
regardless of whether the inputs changed or not. The only real
incremental win we could have here is if zero of the input modules
changed, but that's so rare it's unlikely to be worthwhile to implement
such a code path.
cc #57968
cc rust-lang/cargo#6643
|
|
Add an option to print the status of incremental tasks / dep nodes after running them
r? @michaelwoerister
|
|
Rename rustc_errors dependency in rust 2018 crates
I think this is a better solution than `use rustc_errors as errors` in `lib.rs` and `use crate::errors` in modules.
Related: rust-lang/cargo#5653
cc #58099
r? @Centril
|
|
Stabilize linker-plugin based LTO (aka cross-language LTO)
This PR stabilizes [linker plugin based LTO](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49879), also known as "cross-language LTO" because it allows for doing inlining and other optimizations across language boundaries in mixed Rust/C/C++ projects.
As described in the tracking issue, it works by making `rustc` emit LLVM bitcode instead of machine code, the same as `clang` does. A linker with the proper plugin (like LLD) can then run (Thin)LTO across all modules.
The feature has been implemented over a number of pull requests and there are various [codegen](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/codegen/no-dllimport-w-cross-lang-lto.rs) and [run](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/master/src/test/run-make-fulldeps/cross-lang-lto-clang)-[make](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/master/src/test/run-make-fulldeps/cross-lang-lto-upstream-rlibs) [tests](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/master/src/test/run-make-fulldeps/cross-lang-lto) that make sure that it keeps working.
It also works for building big projects like [Firefox](https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=2ce2d5ddcea6fbff790503eac406954e469b2f5d).
The PR makes the feature available under the `-C linker-plugin-lto` flag. As discussed in the tracking issue it is not cross-language specific and also not LLD specific. `-C linker-plugin-lto` is descriptive of what it does. If someone has a better name, let me know `:)`
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currently the compiler will produce an error if both incremental
compilation and full fat LTO is requested. With recent changes and the
advent of incremental ThinLTO, however, all the hard work is already
done for us and it's actually not too bad to remove this error!
This commit updates the codegen backend to allow incremental full fat
LTO. The semantics are that the input modules to LTO are all produce
incrementally, but the final LTO step is always done unconditionally
regardless of whether the inputs changed or not. The only real
incremental win we could have here is if zero of the input modules
changed, but that's so rare it's unlikely to be worthwhile to implement
such a code path.
cc #57968
cc rust-lang/cargo#6643
|
|
running them
|
|
|
|
Move privacy checking later in the pipeline and make some passes run in parallel
r? @michaelwoerister
|
|
Move librustc to 2018
r? @Centril
Part of #58099
It would be great to get this reviewed quickly to avoid merge conflicts...
|
|
Add a forever unstable opt-out of const qualification checks
r? @eddyb
cc @RalfJung @Centril
basically a forever unstable way to screw with const things in horribly unsafe, unsound and incoherent ways.
Note that this does *not* affect miri except by maybe violating assumptions that miri makes. But there's no change in how miri evaluates things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combine all builtin early lints
This also adds a -Z no-interleave-lints option to allow benchmarking lints.
r? @estebank
|
|
|
|
Add missing unpretty option help message
There are some missing help messages that is printed `ructc -Zunpretty help` and receiving invalid option.
related with #16419, #45721, #21085, #31916
|
|
Querify `entry_fn`
Analogous to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/57570 but this will also require few fixups in Miri so I decided to separate that (and it seems [CI doesn't let us break tools anymore](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/57392#issuecomment-453801540)? Or was that because it was a rollup PR?)
r? @nikomatsakis
|
|
Add a target option "merge-functions", and a corresponding -Z flag (works around #57356)
This commit adds a target option "merge-functions", which takes values in ("disabled", "trampolines", or "aliases" (default is "aliases")), to allow targets to opt out of the MergeFunctions LLVM pass. Additionally, the latest commit also adds an optional -Z flag, "merge-functions", which takes the same values and has precedence over the target option when both are specified.
This works around https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/57356.
cc @eddyb @japaric @oli-obk @nox @nagisa
Also thanks to @denzp and @gnzlbg for discussing this on rust-cuda!
### Motivation
Basically, the problem is that the MergeFunctions pass, which rustc currently enables by default at -O2 and -O3 [1], and `extern "ptx-kernel"` functions (specific to the NVPTX target) are currently not compatible with each other. If the MergeFunctions pass is allowed to run, rustc can generate invalid PTX assembly (i.e. a PTX file that is not accepted by the native PTX assembler `ptxas`). Therefore we would like a way to opt out of the MergeFunctions pass, which is what our target option does.
### Related work
The current behavior of rustc is to enable MergeFunctions at -O2 and -O3 [1], and also to enable the use of function aliases within MergeFunctions [2] [3]. MergeFunctions seems to have some benefits, such as reducing code size and fixing a crash [4], which is why it is enabled. However, MergeFunctions both with and without function aliases is incompatible with the NVPTX target; a more detailed example for both cases is given below.
clang's "solution" is to have a "-fmerge-functions" flag that opts in to the MergeFunctions pass, but it is not enabled by default.
### Examples/more details
Consider an example Rust lib using `extern "ptx-kernel"` functions: https://github.com/peterhj/nvptx-mergefunc-bug/blob/master/nocore.rs. If we try to compile this with nightly rustc, we get the following compiler error:
LLVM ERROR: Module has aliases, which NVPTX does not support.
This error happens because: (1) functions `foo` and `bar` have the same body, so are candidates to be merged by MergeFunctions; and (2) rustc configures MergeFunctions to generate function aliases using the "mergefunc-use-aliases" LLVM option [2] [3], but the NVPTX backend does not support those aliases.
Okay, so we can try omitting "mergefunc-use-aliases", and then rustc will happily emit PTX assembly: https://github.com/peterhj/nvptx-mergefunc-bug/blob/master/nocore-mergefunc-nousealiases-bad.ptx. However, this PTX is invalid! When we try to assemble it with `ptxas` (I'm on the CUDA 9.2 toolchain), we get an assembler error:
ptxas nocore-mergefunc-nousealiases-bad.ptx, line 38; error : Illegal call target, device function expected
ptxas fatal : Ptx assembly aborted due to errors
What's happening is that MergeFunctions rewrites the `bar` function to call `foo`. However, directly calling an `extern "ptx-kernel"` function from another `extern "ptx-kernel"` is wrong.
If we disable the MergeFunctions pass from running at all, rustc generates correct PTX assembly: https://github.com/peterhj/nvptx-mergefunc-bug/blob/master/nocore-nomergefunc-ok.ptx
[1] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a36b960df626cbb8bea74f01243318b73f0bd201/src/librustc_codegen_ssa/back/write.rs#L155
[2] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a36b960df626cbb8bea74f01243318b73f0bd201/src/librustc_codegen_llvm/llvm_util.rs#L64
[3] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/56358
[4] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/49479
|