| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Add links to the reference and rust by example for asm! docs and lints
These were previously removed in #91728 due to broken links.
cc ``@ehuss`` since this updates the rust-by-example submodule
|
|
|
|
They are also removed from the prelude as per the decision in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87228.
stdarch and compiler-builtins are updated to work with the new, stable
asm! and global_asm! macros.
|
|
This no longer works now that asm! needs an explicit import. Also, it's
been over a year since asm! landed, everyone should have transitioned by
now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allow multiple clobber_abi in asm
Update docs
Fix aarch64 test
Combine abis
Emit duplicate ABI error, empty ABI list error
multiple clobber_abi
|
|
architectures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remove trailing semicolon from macro call span
Macro call site spans are now less surprising/more consistent since they no longer contain a semicolon after the macro call.
The downside is that we need to do a little guesswork to get the semicolon in diagnostics. But this should not be noticeable since it is rare for the semicolon to not immediately follow the macro call.
|
|
|
|
The checking variant ensures that the offset required is not larger than
12 bits - hence we wouldn't ever need the upper 12 bits.
|
|
|
|
Add unit assignment to MIR for `asm!()`
Fixes #89305. `ExprKind::LlvmInlineAsm` gets a `push_assign_unit()` here:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/2b6ed3b675475abc01ce7e68bb75b457f0c85684/compiler/rustc_mir_build/src/build/expr/into.rs#L475-L479
The same should probably happen for `ExprKind::InlineAsm`, which fixes the "use of possibly-uninitialized variable" error described in #89305.
|
|
|
|
Update new tests to run on aarch64 platforms.
|
|
Enable tests which are largely architecture-independent on all supported
platforms
|
|
Improve error message when _ is used for in/inout asm operands
As suggested by ```@Commeownist``` in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/72016#issuecomment-903102415.
|
|
The definition order is already close to the span order, and only differs
in corner cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forbid `!` from being used in `asm!` output
Fixes #87802
r? `@Amanieu`
|
|
|
|
Add support for clobber_abi to asm!
This PR adds the `clobber_abi` feature that was proposed in #81092.
Fixes #81092
cc `@rust-lang/wg-inline-asm`
r? `@nagisa`
|
|
Lint against named asm labels
This adds a deny-by-default lint to prevent the use of named labels in inline `asm!`. Without a solution to #81088 about whether the compiler should rewrite named labels or a special syntax for labels, a lint against them should prevent users from writing assembly that could break for internal compiler reasons, such as inlining or anything else that could change the number of actual inline assembly blocks emitted.
This does **not** resolve the issue with rewriting labels, that still needs a decision if the compiler should do any more work to try to make them work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Move naked function ABI check to its own lint
This check was previously categorized under the lint named
`UNSUPPORTED_NAKED_FUNCTIONS`. That lint is future incompatible and will
be turned into an error in a future release. However, as defined in the
Constrained Naked Functions RFC, this check should only be a warning.
This is because it is possible for a naked function to be implemented in
such a way that it does not break even the undefined ABI. For example, a
`jmp` to a `const`.
Therefore, this patch defines a new lint named
`UNDEFINED_NAKED_FUNCTION_ABI` which contains just this single check.
Unlike `UNSUPPORTED_NAKED_FUNCTIONS`, `UNDEFINED_NAKED_FUNCTION_ABI`
will not be converted to an error in the future.
rust-lang/rfcs#2774
rust-lang/rfcs#2972
|
|
Validate FFI-safety warnings on naked functions
Test that FFI-safety warnings don't get accidentally dropped on naked
functions. The big picture is that if you implement a naked function
with the Rust ABI you'll get a warning. Further, if you implement a
naked function with a standardized ABI, but use non-FFI-safe types you
will still get a warning.
rust-lang/rfcs#2774
rust-lang/rfcs#2972
cc ``````@joshtriplett`````` ``````@Amanieu`````` ``````@haraldh``````
|
|
|
|
In most calling conventions, accessing function parameters may require
stack access. However, naked functions have no assembly prelude to set
up stack access. This is why naked functions may only contain a single
`asm!()` block. All parameter access is done inside the `asm!()` block,
so we cannot validate the liveness of the input parameters. Therefore,
we should disable the lint for naked functions.
rust-lang/rfcs#2774
rust-lang/rfcs#2972
|
|
This test proves that naked functions are treated the same as regular
functions regarding unused function parameters. We will change this
behavior in the next patch.
|
|
This check was previously categorized under the lint named
`UNSUPPORTED_NAKED_FUNCTIONS`. That lint is future incompatible and will
be turned into an error in a future release. However, as defined in the
Constrained Naked Functions RFC, this check should only be a warning.
This is because it is possible for a naked function to be implemented in
such a way that it does not break even the undefined ABI. For example, a
`jmp` to a `const`.
Therefore, this patch defines a new lint named
`UNDEFINED_NAKED_FUNCTION_ABI` which contains just this single check.
Unlike `UNSUPPORTED_NAKED_FUNCTIONS`, `UNDEFINED_NAKED_FUNCTION_ABI`
will not be converted to an error in the future.
rust-lang/rfcs#2774
rust-lang/rfcs#2972
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Test that FFI-safety warnings don't get accidentally dropped on naked
functions. The big picture is that if you implement a naked function
with the Rust ABI you'll get a warning. Further, if you implement a
naked function with a standardized ABI, but use non-FFI-safe types you
will still get a warning.
rust-lang/rfcs#2774
rust-lang/rfcs#2972
|
