Fix a couple Emscripten tests
This fixes a couple Emscripten tests where the correct fix is more or less obvious. A couple UI tests are still broken with this PR:
- `tests/ui/abi/numbers-arithmetic/return-float.rs` (#136197)
- `tests/ui/no_std/no-std-unwind-binary.rs` (haven't debugged yet)
- `tests/ui/test-attrs/test-passed.rs` (haven't debugged this either)
`````@rustbot````` label +T-compiler +O-emscripten
optimize slice::ptr_rotate for small rotates
r? `@scottmcm`
This swaps the positions and numberings of algorithms 1 and 2 in `slice::ptr_rotate`, and pulls the entire outer loop into algorithm 3 since it was redundant for the first two. Effectively, `ptr_rotate` now always does the `memcpy`+`memmove`+`memcpy` sequence if the shifts fit into the stack buffer.
With this change, an `IndexMap`-style `move_index` function is optimized correctly.
Assembly comparisons:
- `move_index`, before: https://godbolt.org/z/Kr616KnYM
- `move_index`, after: https://godbolt.org/z/1aoov6j8h
- the code from `#89714`, before: https://godbolt.org/z/Y4zaPxEG6
- the code from `#89714`, after: https://godbolt.org/z/1dPx83axc
related to #89714
some relevant discussion in https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/idea-shift-move-to-efficiently-move-elements-in-a-vec/22184
Behavior tests pass locally. I can't get any consistent microbenchmark results on my machine, but the assembly diffs look promising.
ABI-required target features: warn when they are missing in base CPU
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/135408:
instead of adding ABI-required features to the target we build for LLVM, check that they are already there. Crucially we check this after applying `-Ctarget-cpu` and `-Ctarget-feature`, by reading `sess.unstable_target_features`. This means we can tweak the ABI target feature check without changing the behavior for any existing user; they will get warnings but the target features behave as before.
The test changes here show that we are un-doing the "add all required target features" part. Without the full #135408, there is no way to take a way an ABI-required target feature with `-Ctarget-cpu`, so we cannot yet test that part.
Cc ``@workingjubilee``
Windows x86: Change i128 to return via the vector ABI
Clang and GCC both return `i128` in xmm0 on windows-msvc and windows-gnu. Currently, Rust returns the type on the stack. Add a calling convention adjustment so we also return scalar `i128`s using the vector ABI, which makes our `i128` compatible with C.
In the future, Clang may change to return `i128` on the stack for its `-msvc` targets (more at [1]). If this happens, the change here will need to be adjusted to only affect MinGW.
Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/134288 (does not fix) [1]
try-job: x86_64-msvc
try-job: x86_64-msvc-ext1
try-job: x86_64-mingw-1
try-job: x86_64-mingw-2
Clang and GCC both return `i128` in xmm0 on windows-msvc and
windows-gnu. Currently, Rust returns the type on the stack. Add a
calling convention adjustment so we also return scalar `i128`s using the
vector ABI, which makes our `i128` compatible with C.
In the future, Clang may change to return `i128` on the stack for its
`-msvc` targets (more at [1]). If this happens, the change here will
need to be adjusted to only affect MinGW.
Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/134288
Currently we both pass and return `i128` indirectly on Windows for MSVC
and MinGW, but this will be adjusted. Introduce a test verifying the
current state.
This improves the codegen for vector `select`, `gather`, `scatter` and
boolean reduction intrinsics and fixesrust-lang/portable-simd#316.
The current behavior of most mask operations during llvm codegen is to
truncate the mask vector to <N x i1>, telling llvm to use the least
significat bit. The exception is the `simd_bitmask` intrinsics, which
already used the most signifiant bit.
Since sse/avx instructions are defined to use the most significant bit,
truncating means that llvm has to insert a left shift to move the bit
into the most significant position, before the mask can actually be
used.
Similarly on aarch64, mask operations like blend work bit by bit,
repeating the least significant bit across the whole lane involves
shifting it into the sign position and then comparing against zero.
By shifting before truncating to <N x i1>, we tell llvm that we only
consider the most significant bit, removing the need for additional
shift instructions in the assembly.
use `PassMode::Direct` for vector types on `s390x`
closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/135744
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130869
Previously, all vector types were type erased to `Ni8`, now we pass non-wrapped vector types directly. That skips emitting a bunch of casting logic in rustc, that LLVM then has to clean up. The initial LLVM IR is also a bit more readable.
This calling convention is tested extensively in `tests/assembly/s390x-vector-abi.rs`, showing that this change has no impact on the ABI in practice.
r? ````@taiki-e````
Update our range `assume`s to the format that LLVM prefers
I found out in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/123278#issuecomment-2597440158 that the way I started emitting the `assume`s in #109993 was suboptimal, and as seen in that LLVM issue the way we're doing it -- with two `assume`s sometimes -- can at times lead to CVP/SCCP not realize what's happening because one of them turns into a `ne` instead of conveying a range.
So this updates how it's emitted from
```
assume( x >= LOW );
assume( x <= HIGH );
```
or
```
// (for ranges that wrap the range)
assume( (x <= LOW) | (x >= HIGH) );
```
to
```
assume( (x - LOW) <= (HIGH - LOW) );
```
so that we don't need multiple `icmp`s nor multiple `assume`s for a single value, and both wrappping and non-wrapping ranges emit the same shape.
(And we don't bother emitting the subtraction if `LOW` is zero, since that's trivial for us to check too.)
remove support for the (unstable) #[start] attribute
As explained by `@Noratrieb:`
`#[start]` should be deleted. It's nothing but an accidentally leaked implementation detail that's a not very useful mix between "portable" entrypoint logic and bad abstraction.
I think the way the stable user-facing entrypoint should work (and works today on stable) is pretty simple:
- `std`-using cross-platform programs should use `fn main()`. the compiler, together with `std`, will then ensure that code ends up at `main` (by having a platform-specific entrypoint that gets directed through `lang_start` in `std` to `main` - but that's just an implementation detail)
- `no_std` platform-specific programs should use `#![no_main]` and define their own platform-specific entrypoint symbol with `#[no_mangle]`, like `main`, `_start`, `WinMain` or `my_embedded_platform_wants_to_start_here`. most of them only support a single platform anyways, and need cfg for the different platform's ways of passing arguments or other things *anyways*
`#[start]` is in a super weird position of being neither of those two. It tries to pretend that it's cross-platform, but its signature is a total lie. Those arguments are just stubbed out to zero on ~~Windows~~ wasm, for example. It also only handles the platform-specific entrypoints for a few platforms that are supported by `std`, like Windows or Unix-likes. `my_embedded_platform_wants_to_start_here` can't use it, and neither could a libc-less Linux program.
So we have an attribute that only works in some cases anyways, that has a signature that's a total lie (and a signature that, as I might want to add, has changed recently, and that I definitely would not be comfortable giving *any* stability guarantees on), and where there's a pretty easy way to get things working without it in the first place.
Note that this feature has **not** been RFCed in the first place.
*This comment was posted [in May](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29633#issuecomment-2088596042) and so far nobody spoke up in that issue with a usecase that would require keeping the attribute.*
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29633
try-job: x86_64-gnu-nopt
try-job: x86_64-msvc-1
try-job: x86_64-msvc-2
try-job: test-various
Reexport likely/unlikely in std::hint
Since `likely`/`unlikely` should be working now, we could reexport them in `std::hint`. I'm not sure if this is already approved or if it requires approval
Tracking issue: #26179
Add gpu-kernel calling convention
The amdgpu-kernel calling convention was reverted in commit f6b21e90d1 (#120495 and https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/pull/16463) due to inactivity in the amdgpu target.
Introduce a `gpu-kernel` calling convention that translates to `ptx_kernel` or `amdgpu_kernel`, depending on the target that rust compiles for.
Tracking issue: #135467
amdgpu target tracking issue: #135024
The amdgpu-kernel calling convention was reverted in commit
f6b21e90d1 due to inactivity in the amdgpu
target.
Introduce a `gpu-kernel` calling convention that translates to
`ptx_kernel` or `amdgpu_kernel`, depending on the target that rust
compiles for.
fix handling of ZST in win64 ABI on windows-msvc targets
The Microsoft calling conventions do not really say anything about ZST since they do not seem to exist in MSVC. However, both GCC and clang allow passing ZST over `__attribute__((ms_abi))` functions (which matches our `extern "win64" fn`) on `windows-gnu` targets, and therefore implicitly define a de-facto ABI for these types (and lucky enough they seem to define the same ABI). This ABI should be the same for windows-msvc and windows-gnu targets, so we use this as a hint for how to implement this ABI everywhere: we always pass ZST by-ref.
The best alternative would be to just reject compiling functions which cannot exist in MSVC, but that would be a breaking change.
Cc `@programmerjake` `@ChrisDenton`
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132893
add `-Zmin-function-alignment`
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82232
This PR adds the `-Zmin-function-alignment=<align>` flag, that specifies a minimum alignment for all* functions.
### Motivation
This feature is requested by RfL [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/128830):
> i.e. the equivalents of `-fmin-function-alignment` ([GCC](https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#index-fmin-function-alignment_003dn), Clang does not support it) / `-falign-functions` ([GCC](https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#index-falign-functions), [Clang](https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ClangCommandLineReference.html#cmdoption-clang1-falign-functions)).
>
> For the Linux kernel, the behavior wanted is that of GCC's `-fmin-function-alignment` and Clang's `-falign-functions`, i.e. align all functions, including cold functions.
>
> There is [`feature(fn_align)`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82232), but we need to do it globally.
### Behavior
The `fn_align` feature does not have an RFC. It was decided at the time that it would not be necessary, but maybe we feel differently about that now? In any case, here are the semantics of this flag:
- `-Zmin-function-alignment=<align>` specifies the minimum alignment of all* functions
- the `#[repr(align(<align>))]` attribute can be used to override the function alignment on a per-function basis: when `-Zmin-function-alignment` is specified, the attribute's value is only used when it is higher than the value passed to `-Zmin-function-alignment`.
- the target may decide to use a higher value (e.g. on x86_64 the minimum that LLVM generates is 16)
- The highest supported alignment in rust is `2^29`: I checked a bunch of targets, and they all emit the `.p2align 29` directive for targets that align functions at all (some GPU stuff does not have function alignment).
*: Only with `build-std` would the minimum alignment also be applied to `std` functions.
---
cc `@ojeda`
r? `@workingjubilee` you were active on the tracking issue
Update a bunch of library types for MCP807
This greatly reduces the number of places that actually use the `rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_*` attributes down to just 3:
```
library/core\src\ptr\non_null.rs
68:#[rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_start(1)]
library/core\src\num\niche_types.rs
19: #[rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_start($low)]
20: #[rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_end($high)]
```
Everything else -- PAL Nanoseconds, alloc's `Cap`, niched FDs, etc -- all just wrap those `niche_types` types.
r? ghost
This greatly reduces the number of places that actually use the `rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_*` attributes down to just 3:
```
library/core\src\ptr\non_null.rs
68:#[rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_start(1)]
library/core\src\num\niche_types.rs
19: #[rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_start($low)]
20: #[rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_end($high)]
```
Everything else -- PAL Nanoseconds, alloc's `Cap`, niched FDs, etc -- all just wrap those `niche_types` types.
Add support for wasm exception handling to Emscripten target
This is a draft because we need some additional setting for the Emscripten target to select between the old exception handling and the new exception handling. I don't know how to add a setting like that, would appreciate advice from Rust folks. We could maybe choose to use the new exception handling if `Ctarget-feature=+exception-handling` is passed? I tried this but I get errors from llvm so I'm not doing it right.
Merge the intrinsic and user tests for `select_unpredictable`
[1] mentions that having a single test with `-Zmerge-functions=disabled` is preferable to having two separate tests. Apply that to the new `select_unpredictable` test here.
[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133964#issuecomment-2569693325
Add a notion of "some ABIs require certain target features"
I think I finally found the right shape for the data and checks that I recently added in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133099, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133417, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/134337: we have a notion of "this ABI requires the following list of target features, and it is incompatible with the following list of target features". Both `-Ctarget-feature` and `#[target_feature]` are updated to ensure we follow the rules of the ABI. This removes all the "toggleability" stuff introduced before, though we do keep the notion of a fully "forbidden" target feature -- this is needed to deal with target features that are actual ABI switches, and hence are needed to even compute the list of required target features.
We always explicitly (un)set all required and in-conflict features, just to avoid potential trouble caused by the default features of whatever the base CPU is. We do this *before* applying `-Ctarget-feature` to maintain backward compatibility; this poses a slight risk of missing some implicit feature dependencies in LLVM but has the advantage of not breaking users that deliberately toggle ABI-relevant target features. They get a warning but the feature does get toggled the way they requested.
For now, our logic supports x86, ARM, and RISC-V (just like the previous logic did). Unsurprisingly, RISC-V is the nicest. ;)
As a side-effect this also (unstably) allows *enabling* `x87` when that is harmless. I used the opportunity to mark SSE2 as required on x86-64, to better match the actual logic in LLVM and because all x86-64 chips do have SSE2. This infrastructure also prepares us for requiring SSE on x86-32 when we want to use that for our ABI (and for float semantics sanity), see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/133611, but no such change is happening in this PR.
r? `@workingjubilee`
