LLVM already supports emitting compressed debuginfo. In debuginfo=full
builds, the debug section is often a large amount of data, and it
typically compresses very well (3x is not unreasonable.) We add a new
knob to allow debuginfo to be compressed when the matching LLVM
functionality is present. Like clang, if a known-but-disabled
compression mechanism is requested, we disable compression and emit
uncompressed debuginfo sections.
The API is different enough on older LLVMs we just pretend the support
is missing on LLVM older than 16.
Upstream change
llvm/llvm-project@6b539f5eb8 changed
`isSectionBitcode` works and it now only respects `.llvm.lto` sections
instead of also `.llvmbc`, which it says was never intended to be used
for LTO. We instead load sections by name, and sniff for raw bitcode by
hand.
r? @nikic
@rustbot label: +llvm-main
CFI: Fix error compiling core with LLVM CFI enabled
Fix#90546 by filtering out global value function pointer types from the type tests, and adding the LowerTypeTests pass to the rustc LTO optimization pipelines.
Fix#90546 by filtering out global value function pointer types from the
type tests, and adding the LowerTypeTests pass to the rustc LTO
optimization pipelines.
Filter out short-lived LLVM diagnostics before they reach the rustc handler
During profiling I saw remark passes being unconditionally enabled: for example `Machine Optimization Remark Emitter`.
The diagnostic remarks enabled by default are [from missed optimizations and opt analyses](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/113339#discussion_r1259480303). They are created by LLVM, passed to the diagnostic handler on the C++ side, emitted to rust, where they are unpacked, C++ strings are converted to rust, etc.
Then they are discarded in the vast majority of the time (i.e. unless some kind of `-Cremark` has enabled some of these passes' output to be printed).
These unneeded allocations are very short-lived, basically only lasting between the LLVM pass emitting them and the rust handler where they are discarded. So it doesn't hugely impact max-rss, and is only a slight reduction in instruction count (cachegrind reports a reduction between 0.3% and 0.5%) _on linux_. It's possible that targets without `jemalloc` or with a worse allocator, may optimize these less.
It is however significant in the aggregate, looking at the total number of allocated bytes:
- it's the biggest source of allocations according to dhat, on the benchmarks I've tried e.g. `syn` or `cargo`
- allocations on `syn` are reduced by 440MB, 17% (from 2440722647 bytes total, to 2030461328 bytes)
- allocations on `cargo` are reduced by 6.6GB, 19% (from 35371886402 bytes total, to 28723987743 bytes)
Some of these diagnostics objects [are allocated in LLVM](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/113339#discussion_r1252387484) *before* they're emitted to our diagnostic handler, where they'll be filtered out. So we could remove those in the future, but that will require changing a few LLVM call-sites upstream, so I left a FIXME.
now that remarks are filtered before cg_llvm's diagnostic handler callback
is called, we don't need to do the filtering post c++-to-rust conversion
of the diagnostic.
cleanup: remove pointee types
This can't be merged until the oldest LLVM version we support uses opaque pointers, which will be the case after #114148. (Also note `-Cllvm-args="-opaque-pointers=0"` can technically be used in LLVM 15, though I don't think we should support that configuration.)
I initially hoped this would provide some minor perf win, but in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/105412#issuecomment-1341224450 it had very little impact, so this is only valuable as a cleanup.
As a followup, this will enable #96242 to be resolved.
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` label S-blocked
Add `-Zremark-dir` unstable flag to write LLVM optimization remarks to YAML
This PR adds an option for `rustc` to emit LLVM optimization remarks to a set of YAML files, which can then be digested by existing tools, like https://github.com/OfekShilon/optview2. When `-Cremark-dir` is passed, and remarks are enabled (`-Cremark=all`), the remarks will be now written to the specified directory, **instead** of being printed to standard error output. The files are named based on the CGU from which they are being generated.
Currently, the remarks are written using the LLVM streaming machinery, directly in the diagnostics handler. It seemed easier than going back to Rust and then form there back to C++ to use the streamer from the diagnostics handler. But there are many ways to implement this, of course, so I'm open to suggestions :)
I included some comments with questions into the code. Also, I'm not sure how to test this.
r? `@tmiasko`
Add `kernel-address` sanitizer support for freestanding targets
This PR adds support for KASan (kernel address sanitizer) instrumentation in freestanding targets. I included the minimal set of `x86_64-unknown-none`, `riscv64{imac, gc}-unknown-none-elf`, and `aarch64-unknown-none` but there's likely other targets it can be added to. (`linux_kernel_base.rs`?) KASan uses the address sanitizer attributes but has the `CompileKernel` parameter set to `true` in the pass creation.
`CompiledModule` should not think a DWARF object was emitted when a
bitcode-only compilation has happened, this can confuse archive file
creation (which expects to create an archive containing non-existent dwo
files).
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Update the minimum external LLVM to 13
With this change, we'll have stable support for LLVM 13 through 15 (pending release).
For reference, the previous increase to LLVM 12 was #90175.
r? `@nagisa`
Adding the option to control from rustc CLI
if the resulted ".o" bitcode module files are with
thinLTO info or regular LTO info.
Allows using "-lto-embed-bitcode=optimized" during linkage
correctly.
Signed-off-by: Ziv Dunkelman <ziv.dunkelman@nextsilicon.com>
Support lint expectations for `--force-warn` lints (RFC 2383)
Rustc has a `--force-warn` flag, which overrides lint level attributes and forces the diagnostics to always be warn. This means, that for lint expectations, the diagnostic can't be suppressed as usual. This also means that the expectation would not be fulfilled, even if a lint had been triggered in the expected scope.
This PR now also tracks the expectation ID in the `ForceWarn` level. I've also made some minor adjustments, to possibly catch more bugs and make the whole implementation more robust.
This will probably conflict with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97718. That PR should ideally be reviewed and merged first. The conflict itself will be trivial to fix.
---
r? `@wesleywiser`
cc: `@flip1995` since you've helped with the initial review and also discussed this topic with me. 🙃
Follow-up of: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87835
Issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85549
Yeah, and that's it.
Add Apple WatchOS compile targets
Hello,
I would like to add the following target triples for Apple WatchOS as Tier 3 platforms:
armv7k-apple-watchos
arm64_32-apple-watchos
x86_64-apple-watchos-sim
There are some pre-requisites Pull Requests:
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-builtins/pull/456 (merged)
https://github.com/alexcrichton/cc-rs/pull/662 (pending)
https://github.com/rust-lang/libc/pull/2717 (merged)
There will be a subsequent PR with standard library changes for WatchOS. Previous compiler and library changes were in a single PR (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/94736) which is now closed in favour of separate PRs.
Many thanks!
Vlad.
### Tier 3 Target Requirements
Adds support for Apple WatchOS compile targets.
Below are details on how this target meets the requirements for tier 3:
> 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.)
`@deg4uss3r` has volunteered to be the target maintainer. I am also happy to help if a second maintainer is required.
> 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 other Apple 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 support will be added in a subsequent PR.
> 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=<target> option to cross compile, just like any target. Tests can be run using the WatchOS simulator (see https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/running-your-app-in-the-simulator-or-on-a-device).
> 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.
Make -Cpasses= only apply to pre-link optimization
This change causes passes specified in -Cpasses= to be applied
only during pre-link optimization, not during LTO. This avoids
such passes running multiple times, which they may not be
designed for.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/97713
This change causes passes specified in -Cpasses= to be applied
only during pre-link optimization, not during LTO. This avoids
such passes running multiple times, which they may not be
designed for.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/97713
