Improve default target options for x86_64-unknown-linux-none
Without a standard library, we cannot unwind, so it should be panic=abort by default.
Additionally, it does not have std because while it is Linux, it cannot use libc, which std uses today for Linux.
Using PIE by default may be surprising to users, as shown in #134763, so I've documented it explicitly. I'm not sure if we want to count that as fixing the issue or not.
cc `@morr0ne,` as you added the target (and are the maintainer), and `@Noratrieb,` who reviewed that PR (:D).
Without a standard library, we cannot unwind, so it should be
panic=abort by default.
Additionally, it does not have std because while it is
Linux, it cannot use libc, which std uses today for Linux.
Re-export more `rustc_span::symbol` things from `rustc_span`.
`rustc_span::symbol` defines some things that are re-exported from `rustc_span`, such as `Symbol` and `sym`. But it doesn't re-export some closely related things such as `Ident` and `kw`. So you can do `use rustc_span::{Symbol, sym}` but you have to do `use rustc_span::symbol::{Ident, kw}`, which is inconsistent for no good reason.
This commit re-exports `Ident`, `kw`, and `MacroRulesNormalizedIdent`, and changes many `rustc_span::symbol::` qualifiers to `rustc_span::`. This is a 300+ net line of code reduction, mostly because many files with two `use rustc_span` items can be reduced to one.
r? `@jieyouxu`
`rustc_span::symbol` defines some things that are re-exported from
`rustc_span`, such as `Symbol` and `sym`. But it doesn't re-export some
closely related things such as `Ident` and `kw`. So you can do `use
rustc_span::{Symbol, sym}` but you have to do `use
rustc_span::symbol::{Ident, kw}`, which is inconsistent for no good
reason.
This commit re-exports `Ident`, `kw`, and `MacroRulesNormalizedIdent`,
and changes many `rustc_span::symbol::` qualifiers in `compiler/` to
`rustc_span::`. This is a 200+ net line of code reduction, mostly
because many files with two `use rustc_span` items can be reduced to
one.
Promote powerpc64le-unknown-linux-musl to tier 2 with host tools
MCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/803
I'm using crosstool-ng for building a toolchain because GCC 9 from `musl-toolchain.sh` has float ABI issues (?) and can't compile LLVM, and writing a crosstool-ng config for a target feels less hacky than yet another target specific shell script. I also defined a kernel version, since there wasn't one specified before. If a lower version is desired, just let me know. I also tried to match the rust configure args with the loongarch64 musl tier 2 target.
The resulting compiler works fine, built with `DEPLOY=1 ./src/ci/docker/run.sh dist-powerpc64le-linux` and tested on Alpine Linux in a VM and on a bare metal POWER8 machine:
```
qemu-ppc64le:/tmp/rust-nightly-powerpc64le-unknown-linux-musl$ ash install.sh
install: creating uninstall script at /usr/local/lib/rustlib/uninstall.sh
install: installing component 'rustc'
install: installing component 'rust-std-powerpc64le-unknown-linux-musl'
install: installing component 'cargo'
install: installing component 'rustfmt-preview'
install: installing component 'rls-preview'
install: installing component 'rust-analyzer-preview'
install: installing component 'llvm-tools-preview'
install: installing component 'clippy-preview'
install: installing component 'miri-preview'
install: installing component 'rust-analysis-powerpc64le-unknown-linux-musl'
install: installing component 'llvm-bitcode-linker-preview'
install: WARNING: failed to run ldconfig. this may happen when not installing as root. run with --verbose to see the error
rust installed.
qemu-ppc64le:~$ echo 'fn main() { println!("hello world"); }' > test.rs
qemu-ppc64le:~$ rustc test.rs
qemu-ppc64le:~$ ./test
hello world
qemu-ppc64le:~$ file test
test: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, 64-bit PowerPC or cisco 7500, OpenPOWER ELF V2 ABI, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, BuildID[sha1]=596ee6abf9add487ebc54fb71c2076fb6faea013, with debug_info, not stripped
```
try-job: dist-powerpc64le-linux
reject unsound toggling of RISCV target features
~~Stacked on top of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133417, only the last commit is new.~~
Works towards https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132618 (but more [remains to be done](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/134337#issuecomment-2544228958))
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116344
Cc ``@beetrees`` I hope I got everything. I didn't do anything about "The f and zfinx features are incompatible" and that's not an ABI thing (right?) and I am not sure how to handle it with these ABI checks.
r? ``@workingjubilee``
Ideally we'd also reject target specs that disable the `f` feature but set an ABI that requires `f`... but I don't want to duplicate this logic. I have some ideas for how maybe the entire float ABI check logic should be different, now that we have some examples of what these ABI checks look like, but that will be a future PR.
This allows compile-time configuration based on this.
In the near future we should do this across all RISCV targets, probably,
but this cfg is essential for building software usable on these targets.
reject aarch64 target feature toggling that would change the float ABI
~~Stacked on top of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133099. Only the last two commits are new.~~
The first new commit lays the groundwork for separately controlling whether a feature may be enabled or disabled. The second commit uses that to make it illegal to *disable* the `neon` feature (which is only possible via `-Ctarget-feature`, and so the new check just adds a warning). Enabling the `neon` feature remains allowed on targets that don't disable `neon` or `fp-armv8`, which is all our built-in targets. This way, the entire PR is not a breaking change.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131058 for hardfloat targets (together with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133102 which fixed it for softfloat targets).
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116344.
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #133221 (Add external macros specific diagnostics for check-cfg)
- #133386 (Update linux_musl base to dynamically link the crt by default)
- #134191 (Make some types and methods related to Polonius + Miri public)
- #134227 (Update wasi-sdk used to build WASI targets)
- #134279 ((Re-)return adjustment target if adjust kind is never-to-any)
- #134295 (Encode coroutine-closures in SMIR)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Update linux_musl base to dynamically link the crt by default
However, don't change the behavior of any existing targets at this time. For targets that used the old default, explicitly set `crt_static_default = true`.
This makes it easier for new targets to use the correct defaults while leaving the changing of individual targets to future PRs.
Related to https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/422
forbid toggling x87 and fpregs on hard-float targets
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116344, follow-up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/129884:
The `x87` target feature on x86 and the `fpregs` target feature on ARM must not be disabled on a hardfloat target, as that would change the float ABI. However, *enabling* `fpregs` on ARM is [explicitly requested](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130988) as it seems to be useful. Therefore, we need to refine the distinction of "forbidden" target features and "allowed" target features: all (un)stable target features can determine on a per-target basis whether they should be allowed to be toggled or not. `fpregs` then checks whether the current target has the `soft-float` feature, and if yes, `fpregs` is permitted -- otherwise, it is not. (Same for `x87` on x86).
Also fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132351. Since `fpregs` and `x87` can be enabled on some builds and disabled on others, it would make sense that one can query it via `cfg`. Therefore, I made them behave in `cfg` like any other unstable target feature.
The first commit prepares the infrastructure, but does not change behavior. The second commit then wires up `fpregs` and `x87` with that new infrastructure.
r? `@workingjubilee`
ABI checks: add support for loongarch
LoongArch psABI[^1] specifies that LSX vector types are passed via general-purpose registers, while LASX vector types are passed indirectly through the stack.
This patch addresses the following warnings:
```
warning: this function call uses a SIMD vector type that is not currently supported with the chosen ABI
--> .../library/core/src/../../stdarch/crates/core_arch/src/loongarch64/lsx/generated.rs:3695:5
|
3695 | __lsx_vreplgr2vr_b(a)
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ function called here
|
= warning: this was previously accepted by the compiler but is being phased out; it will become a hard error in a future release!
= note: for more information, see issue #116558 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116558>
= note: `#[warn(abi_unsupported_vector_types)]` on by default
```
[^1]: https://github.com/loongson/la-abi-specs/blob/release/lapcs.adoc
r? `@workingjubilee`
LoongArch psABI[^1] specifies that LSX vector types are passed via general-purpose
registers, while LASX vector types are passed indirectly through the stack.
This patch addresses the following warnings:
```
warning: this function call uses a SIMD vector type that is not currently supported with the chosen ABI
--> .../library/core/src/../../stdarch/crates/core_arch/src/loongarch64/lsx/generated.rs:3695:5
|
3695 | __lsx_vreplgr2vr_b(a)
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ function called here
|
= warning: this was previously accepted by the compiler but is being phased out; it will become a hard error in a future release!
= note: for more information, see issue #116558 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116558>
= note: `#[warn(abi_unsupported_vector_types)]` on by default
```
[^1]: https://github.com/loongson/la-abi-specs/blob/release/lapcs.adoc
rustc_target: ppc64 target string fixes for LLVM 20
LLVM continues to clean these up, and we continue to make this consistent. This is similar to 9caced7bad, e985396145, and
a10e744faf.
```@rustbot``` label: +llvm-main
LLVM continues to clean these up, and we continue to make this
consistent. This is similar to 9caced7bad,
e985396145, and
a10e744faf.
`@rustbot` label: +llvm-main
rust_for_linux: -Zreg-struct-return commandline flag for X86 (#116973)
Command line flag `-Zreg-struct-return` for X86 (32-bit) for rust-for-linux.
This flag enables the same behavior as the `abi_return_struct_as_int` target spec key.
- Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116973
Mark visionOS as supporting `std`
Cargo's -Zbuild-std has recently started checking this field, which causes it to fail to compile even though we have full support for the standard library on these targets.
[Example of failed build](https://github.com/rust-random/getrandom/actions/runs/12069033154/job/33655430622).
Affected targets: `aarch64-apple-visionos` and `aarch64-apple-visionos-sim`.
r? Noratrieb (because you've worked with `rustc` target metadata IIRC)
``@rustbot`` label O-visionos
Support input/output in vector registers of PowerPC inline assembly
This extends currently clobber-only vector registers (`vreg`) support to allow passing `#[repr(simd)]` types as input/output.
| Architecture | Register class | Target feature | Allowed types |
| ------------ | -------------- | -------------- | -------------- |
| PowerPC | `vreg` | `altivec` | `i8x16`, `i16x8`, `i32x4`, `f32x4` |
| PowerPC | `vreg` | `vsx` | `f32`, `f64`, `i64x2`, `f64x2` |
In addition to floats and `core::simd` types listed above, `core::arch` types and custom `#[repr(simd)]` types of the same size and type are also allowed. All allowed types and relevant target features are currently unstable.
r? `@Amanieu`
`@rustbot` label +O-PowerPC +A-inline-assembly
Add `+forced-atomics` feature to esp32s2 no_std target
Similar to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/114499 but for the Xtensa backend. The ESP32-S2 doesn't have native atomic support, but can have atomic load/stores as part of the ISA with this LLVM codegen feature.
Note: The current rev of LLVM that rustc is using doesn't contain the `+forced-atomics` feature for Xtensa, but I'm pushing this now to remove the patch from our fork in `esp-rs/rust`.
r? ``@Amanieu`` because you reviewed the related RISC-V PR
Fix target_feature handling in freg of LoongArch inline assembly
In LoongArch inline assembly, freg currently always accepts f32/f64 as input/output.
9b4d7c6a40/compiler/rustc_target/src/asm/loongarch.rs (L41)
However, these types actually require f/d target features as in RISC-V.
Otherwise, an (ugly) compile error will occur: https://godbolt.org/z/K61Gq1E9E
f32/f64 without f:
```
error: couldn't allocate output register for constraint '{$f1}'
--> <source>:12:11
|
12 | asm!("", in("$f1") x, lateout("$f1") y);
| ^
```
f64 with f but without d:
```
error: scalar-to-vector conversion failed, possible invalid constraint for vector type
--> <source>:19:11
|
19 | asm!("", in("$f1") x, lateout("$f1") y);
| ^
```
cc ``@heiher``
r? ``@Amanieu``
``@rustbot`` label +O-LoongArch +A-inline-assembly
Support `clobber_abi` in AVR inline assembly
This PR implements the `clobber_abi` part necessary to eventually stabilize the inline assembly for AVR. This is tracked in #93335.
This is heavily inspired by the sibling-PR #131310 for the MSP430. I've explained my reasoning in the first commit message in detail, which is reproduced below for easier reviewing:
This follows the [ABI documentation] of AVR-GCC:
> The [...] call-clobbered general purpose registers (GPRs) are registers that might be destroyed (clobbered) by a function call.
>
> - **R18–R27, R30, R31**
>
> These GPRs are call clobbered. An ordinary function may use them without restoring the contents. [...]
>
> - **R0, T-Flag**
>
> The temporary register and the T-flag in SREG are also call-clobbered, but this knowledge is not exposed explicitly to the compiler (R0 is a fixed register).
Therefore this commit lists the aforementioned registers `r18–r27`, `r30` and `r31` as clobbered registers. Since the `r0` register (listed above as well) is not available in inline assembly at all (potentially because the AVR-GCC considers it a fixed register causing the register to never be used in register allocation and LLVM adopting this), there is no need to list it in the clobber list (the `r0`-variant is not even available). A comment was added to ensure, that the `r0` gets added to the clobber-list once the register gets usable in inline ASM.
Since the SREG is normally considered clobbered anyways (unless the user supplies the `preserve_flags`-option), there is no need to explicitly list a bit in this register (which is not possible to list anyways).
Note, that this commit completely ignores the case of interrupts (that are described in the ABI-specification), since every register touched in an ISR need to be saved anyways.
[ABI documentation]: https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/avr-gcc#Call-Used_Registers
r? ``@Amanieu``
``@rustbot`` label +O-AVR
ensure JSON-defined targets are consistent
We have a `check_consistency` check that ensures some invariants which (presumably) the rest of the compiler relies on. However, JSON targets can easily be written in a way that violates those invariants. So this PR applies the same consistency check to JSON targets that we already enforce for built-in targets.
I have converted many of the assertions in that function to new macros that show a nice error instead of a panic; if people are okay with the general approach here, I can do that for the rest of the checks as well.
This commit adds the relevant registers to the list of clobbered regis-
ters (part of #93335). This follows the [ABI documentation] of AVR-GCC:
> The [...] call-clobbered general purpose registers (GPRs) are
> registers that might be destroyed (clobbered) by a function call.
>
> - **R18–R27, R30, R31**
>
> These GPRs are call clobbered. An ordinary function may use them
> without restoring the contents. [...]
>
> - **R0, T-Flag**
>
> The temporary register and the T-flag in SREG are also call-
> clobbered, but this knowledge is not exposed explicitly to the
> compiler (R0 is a fixed register).
Therefore this commit lists the aforementioned registers `r18–r27`,
`r30` and `r31` as clobbered registers. Since the `r0` register (listed
above as well) is not available in inline assembly at all (potentially
because the AVR-GCC considers it a fixed register causing the register
to never be used in register allocation and LLVM adopting this), there
is no need to list it in the clobber list (the `r0`-variant is not even
available). A comment was added to ensure, that the `r0` gets added to
the clobber-list once the register gets usable in inline ASM.
Since the SREG is normally considered clobbered anyways (unless the user
supplies the `preserve_flags`-option), there is no need to explicitly
list a bit in this register (which is not possible to list anyways).
Note, that this commit completely ignores the case of interrupts (that
are described in the ABI-specification), since every register touched in
an ISR need to be saved anyways.
[ABI documentation]: https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/avr-gcc#Call-Used_Registers
Cargo's -Zbuild-std has recently started checking this field, which
causes it to fail to compile even though we have full support for the
standard library on these targets.
Fix clobber_abi in RV32E and RV64E inline assembly
Currently clobber_abi in RV32E and RV64E inline assembly is implemented using InlineAsmClobberAbi::RiscV, but broken since x16-x31 cannot be used in RV32E and RV64E.
```
error: cannot use register `x16`: register can't be used with the `e` target feature
--> <source>:42:14
|
42 | asm!("", clobber_abi("C"), options(nostack, nomem, preserves_flags));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: cannot use register `x17`: register can't be used with the `e` target feature
--> <source>:42:14
|
42 | asm!("", clobber_abi("C"), options(nostack, nomem, preserves_flags));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: cannot use register `x28`: register can't be used with the `e` target feature
--> <source>:42:14
|
42 | asm!("", clobber_abi("C"), options(nostack, nomem, preserves_flags));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: cannot use register `x29`: register can't be used with the `e` target feature
--> <source>:42:14
|
42 | asm!("", clobber_abi("C"), options(nostack, nomem, preserves_flags));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: cannot use register `x30`: register can't be used with the `e` target feature
--> <source>:42:14
|
42 | asm!("", clobber_abi("C"), options(nostack, nomem, preserves_flags));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: cannot use register `x31`: register can't be used with the `e` target feature
--> <source>:42:14
|
42 | asm!("", clobber_abi("C"), options(nostack, nomem, preserves_flags));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
r? `@Amanieu`
`@rustbot` label O-riscv +A-inline-assembly
the emscripten OS no longer exists on non-wasm targets
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/117338 removed our asmjs targets, which AFAIK means that emscripten only exists on wasm targets. However at least one place in the code still checked "is wasm or is emscripten". Let's fix that.
Cc ```@workingjubilee```
Support input/output in vector registers of s390x inline assembly (under asm_experimental_reg feature)
This extends currently clobber-only vector registers (`vreg`) support to allow passing `#[repr(simd)]` types, floats (f32/f64/f128), and integers (i32/i64/i128) as input/output.
This is unstable and gated under new `#![feature(asm_experimental_reg)]` (tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/133416). If the feature is not enabled, only clober is supported as before.
| Architecture | Register class | Target feature | Allowed types |
| ------------ | -------------- | -------------- | -------------- |
| s390x | `vreg` | `vector` | `i32`, `f32`, `i64`, `f64`, `i128`, `f128`, `i8x16`, `i16x8`, `i32x4`, `i64x2`, `f32x4`, `f64x2` |
This matches the list of types that are supported by the vector registers in LLVM:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-19.1.0/llvm/lib/Target/SystemZ/SystemZRegisterInfo.td#L301-L313
In addition to `core::simd` types and floats listed above, custom `#[repr(simd)]` types of the same size and type are also allowed. All allowed types other than i32/f32/i64/f64/i128, and relevant target features are currently unstable.
Currently there is no SIMD type for s390x in `core::arch`, but this is tracked in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130869.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130869 about vector facility support in s390x
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/125398 & https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116909 about f128 support in asm
`@rustbot` label +O-SystemZ +A-inline-assembly
However, don't change the behavior of any existing targets at this time.
For targets that used the old default, explicitly set `crt_static_default = true`.
This makes it easier for new targets to use the correct defaults while
leaving the changing of individual targets to future PRs.
Related to https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/422
aarch64 softfloat target: always pass floats in int registers
This is a part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131058: on softfloat aarch64 targets, the float registers may be unavailable. And yet, LLVM will happily use them to pass float types if the corresponding target features are enabled. That's a problem as it means enabling/disabling `neon` instructions can change the ABI.
Other targets have a `soft-float` target feature that forces the use of the soft-float ABI no matter whether float registers are enabled or not; aarch64 has nothing like that.
So we follow the aarch64 [softfloat ABI](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131058#issuecomment-2385027423) and treat floats like integers for `extern "C"` functions. For the "Rust" ABI, we do the same for scalars, and then just do something reasonable for ScalarPair that avoids the pointer indirection.
Cc ```@workingjubilee```
Emscripten: link with -sWASM_BIGINT
When linking an executable without dynamic linking, this is a pure improvement. It significantly reduces code size and avoids a lot of buggy behaviors. It is supported in all browsers for many years and in all maintained versions of Node.
It does change the ABI, so people who are dynamically linking with a library or executable that uses the old ABI may need to turn it off. It can be disabled if needed by passing `-Clink-arg -sWASM_BIGINT=0` to `rustc`. But few people will want to turn it off.
Note this includes a libc bump to 0.2.162!
When linking an executable without dynamic linking, this is a pure improvement.
It significantly reduces code size and avoids a lot of buggy behaviors. It is
supported in all browsers for many years and in all maintained versions of
Node.
It does change the ABI, so people who are dynamically linking with a library
or executable that uses the old ABI may need to turn it off. It can be disabled
if needed by passing `-Clink-arg -sWASM_BIGINT=0` to `rustc`. But few people
will want to turn it off.
For the `multivalue` and `reference-types` features this commit is
similar to #117457 in that it's stabilizing target features specific to
WebAssembly targets. The previous PR left out these two features because
they weren't expected to change much about compiled code so it was
unclear what the rationale was. It has [since been discovered][blog]
that `reference-types` can be useful as it changes the binary format of
the `call_indirect` instruction. Additionally [on Zulip][zulip] there's
a use case of detecting these features at compile time and generating a
compile error to better warn users about features not supported on
engines.
This PR then additionally adds the `tail-call` feature which corresponds
to the [tail-call] proposal to WebAssembly. This feature advanced to
"phase 4" in the WebAssembly CG awhile back and has been supported in
LLVM for quite some time now. Engines are finishing up implementations
or have already shipped implementations, so while this is a bit of a
late addition to Rust itself it reflects the current status of
WebAssembly's state of the feature.
A test has been added here not only for these features but other
WebAssembly features as well to showcase that they're usable without
feature gates in stable Rust.
[blog]: https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/09/24/webassembly-targets-change-in-default-target-features.html
[zulip]: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/122651-general/topic/wasm32.20reference-types.20.2F.20multivalue.20in.201.2E82-beta.20not.20enabled/near/473893987
[tail-call]: https://github.com/webassembly/tail-call
Emit warning when calling/declaring functions with unavailable vectors.
On some architectures, vector types may have a different ABI depending on whether the relevant target features are enabled. (The ABI when the feature is disabled is often not specified, but LLVM implements some de-facto ABI.)
As discussed in rust-lang/lang-team#235, this turns out to very easily lead to unsound code.
This commit makes it a post-monomorphization future-incompat warning to declare or call functions using those vector types in a context in which the corresponding target features are disabled, if using an ABI for which the difference is relevant. This ensures that these functions are always called with a consistent ABI.
See the [nomination comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/127731#issuecomment-2288558187) for more discussion.
Part of #116558
r? RalfJung
rustc_target: more target string fixes for LLVM 20
LLVM continues to clean these up, and we continue to make this consistent. This is similar to 9caced7bad and e985396145.
`@rustbot` label: +llvm-main
pointee_info_at: fix logic for recursing into enums
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131834
The logic in `pointee_info_at` was likely written at a time when the null pointer optimization was the *only* enum layout optimization -- and as `Variant::Multiple` kept getting expanded, nobody noticed that the logic is now unsound.
The job of this function is to figure out whether there is a dereferenceable-or-null and aligned pointer at a given offset inside a type. So when we recurse into a multi-variant enum, we better make sure that all the other enum variants must be null! This is the part that was forgotten, and this PR adds it.
The reason this didn't explode in many ways so far is that our references only have 1 niche value (null), so it's not possible on stable to have a multi-variant enum with a dereferenceable pointer and other enum variants that are not null. But with `rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range` attributes one can force such a layout, and if `@the8472's` work on alignment niches ever lands, that will make this possible on stable.
Basic inline assembly support for SPARC and SPARC64
This implements asm_experimental_arch (tracking issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/93335) for SPARC and SPARC64.
This PR includes:
- General-purpose registers `r[0-31]` (`reg` register class, LLVM/GCC constraint `r`)
Supported types: i8, i16, i32, i64 (SPARC64-only)
Aliases: `g[0-7]` (`r[0-7]`), `o[0-7]` (`r[8-15]`), `l[0-7]` (`r[16-23]`), `i[0-7]` (`r[24-31]`)
- `y` register (clobber-only, needed for clobber_abi)
- preserves_flags: Integer condition codes (`icc`, `xcc`) and floating-point condition codes (`fcc*`)
The following are *not* included:
- 64-bit integer support on SPARC-V8+'s global or out registers (`g[0-7]`, `o[0-7]`): GCC's `h` constraint (it seems that there is no corresponding constraint in LLVM?)
- Floating-point registers (LLVM/GCC constraint `e`/`f`):
I initially tried to implement this, but postponed it for now because there seemed to be several parts in LLVM that behaved differently than in the LangRef's description.
- clobber_abi: Support for floating-point registers is needed.
Refs:
- LLVM
- Reserved registers https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-19.1.0/llvm/lib/Target/Sparc/SparcRegisterInfo.cpp#L52
- Register definitions https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-19.1.0/llvm/lib/Target/Sparc/SparcRegisterInfo.td
- Supported constraints https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#supported-constraint-code-list
- GCC
- Reserved registers 63b6967b06/gcc/config/sparc/sparc.h (L633-L658)
- Supported constraints https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Machine-Constraints.html
- SPARC ISA/ABI
- (64-bit ISA) The SPARC Architecture Manual, Version 9
(32-bit ISA) The SPARC Architecture Manual, Version 8
(64-bit ABI) System V Application Binary Interface SPARC Version 9 Processor Supplement, Rev 1.35
(32-bit ABI) System V Application Binary Interface SPARC Processor Supplement, Third Edition
The above docs can be downloaded from https://sparc.org/technical-documents
- (32-bit V8+ ABI) The V8+ Technical Specification
https://temlib.org/pub/SparcStation/Standards/V8plus.pdf
cc `@thejpster` (sparc-unknown-none-elf target maintainer)
(AFAIK, other sparc/sprac64 targets don't have target maintainers)
r? `@Amanieu`
`@rustbot` label +O-SPARC +A-inline-assembly
Remove unused intercrate dependencies
Checked by enabling `-Wunused-crate-dependencies`
`driver_impl` still depends on `index` to forward the `rustc_randomized_layouts` feature, and `rustc_main` depends on several unused crates for sysroot reasons
r? compiler
Remove the `wasm32-wasi` target from rustc
This commit is the final step in the journey of renaming the historical `wasm32-wasi` target in the Rust compiler to `wasm32-wasip1`. Various steps in this journey so far have been:
* 2023-04-03: rust-lang/compiler-team#607 - initial proposal for this rename
* 2024-11-27: rust-lang/compiler-team#695 - amended schedule/procedure for rename
* 2024-01-29: rust-lang/rust#120468 - initial introduction of `wasm32-wasip1`
* 2024-06-18: rust-lang/rust#126662 - warn on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2024-11-08: this PR - remove the `wasm32-wasi` target
The full transition schedule is in [this comment][comment] and is summarized with:
* 2024-05-02: Rust 1.78 released with `wasm32-wasip1` target
* 2024-09-05: Rust 1.81 released warning on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2025-01-09: Rust 1.84 to be released without the `wasm32-wasi` target
This means that support on stable for the replacement target of `wasm32-wasip1` has currently been available for 6 months. Users have already seen warnings on stable for 2 months about usage of `wasm32-wasi` and stable users have another 2 months of warnings before the target is removed from stable.
This commit is intended to be the final step in this transition so the source tree should no longer mention `wasm32-wasi` except in historical reference to the older name of the `wasm32-wasip1` target.
[comment]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120468#issuecomment-1977878747
Add a new `wide-arithmetic` feature for WebAssembly
This commit adds a new rustc target feature named `wide-arithmetic` for WebAssembly targets. This corresponds to the [wide-arithmetic] proposal for WebAssembly which adds new instructions catered towards accelerating integer arithmetic larger than 64-bits. This proposal to WebAssembly is not standard yet so this new feature is flagged as an unstable target feature. Additionally Rust's LLVM version doesn't support this new feature yet since support will first be added in LLVM 20, so the feature filtering logic for LLVM is updated to handle this.
I'll also note that I'm not currently planning to add wasm-specific intrinsics to `std::arch::wasm32` at this time. The currently proposed instructions are all accessible through `i128` or `u128`-based operations which Rust already supports, so intrinsic shouldn't be necessary to get access to these new instructions.
[wide-arithmetic]: https://github.com/WebAssembly/wide-arithmetic
mark some target features as 'forbidden' so they cannot be (un)set with -Ctarget-feature
The context for this is https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116344: some target features change the way floats are passed between functions. Changing those target features is unsound as code compiled for the same target may now use different ABIs.
So this introduces a new concept of "forbidden" target features (on top of the existing "stable " and "unstable" categories), and makes it a hard error to (un)set such a target feature. For now, the x86 and ARM feature `soft-float` is on that list. We'll have to make some effort to collect more relevant features, and similar features from other targets, but that can happen after the basic infrastructure for this landed. (These features are being collected in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131799.)
I've made this a warning for now to give people some time to speak up if this would break something.
MCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/780
Support clobber_abi and vector registers (clobber-only) in PowerPC inline assembly
This supports `clobber_abi` which is one of the requirements of stabilization mentioned in #93335.
This basically does a similar thing I did in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/130630 to implement `clobber_abi` for s390x, but for powerpc/powerpc64/powerpc64le.
- This also supports vector registers (as `vreg`) as clobber-only, which need to support clobbering of them to implement `clobber_abi`.
- `vreg` should be able to accept `#[repr(simd)]` types as input/output if the unstable `altivec` target feature is enabled, but `core::arch::{powerpc,powerpc64}` vector types, `#[repr(simd)]`, and `core::simd` are all unstable, so the fact that this is currently a clobber-only should not be considered a blocker of clobber_abi implementation or stabilization. So I have not implemented it in this PR.
- See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131551 (which is based on this PR) for a PR to implement this.
- (I'm not sticking to whether that PR should be a separate PR or part of this PR, so I can merge that PR into this PR if needed.)
Refs:
- PPC32 SysV: Section "Function Calling Sequence" in [System V Application Binary Interface PowerPC Processor Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/elf/elfspec_ppc.pdf)
- PPC64 ELFv1: Section 3.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-bit PowerPC ELF Application Binary Interface Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/ELF/ppc64/PPC-elf64abi.html#FUNC-CALL)
- PPC64 ELFv2: Section 2.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-Bit ELF V2 ABI Specification](https://openpowerfoundation.org/specifications/64bitelfabi/)
- AIX: [Register usage and conventions](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-register-usage-conventions), [Special registers in the PowerPC®](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-special-registers-in-powerpc), [AIX vector programming](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=concepts-aix-vector-programming)
- Register definition in LLVM: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-19.1.0/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.td#L189
If I understand the above four ABI documentations correctly, except for the PPC32 SysV's VR (Vector Registers) and 32-bit AIX (currently not supported by rustc)'s r13, there does not appear to be important differences in terms of implementing `clobber_abi`:
- The above four ABIs are consistent about FPR (0-13: volatile, 14-31: nonvolatile), CR (0-1,5-7: volatile, 2-4: nonvolatile), XER (volatile), and CTR (volatile).
- As for GPR, only the registers we are treating as reserved are slightly different
- r0, r3-r12 are volatile
- r1(sp, reserved), r14-31 are nonvolatile
- r2(reserved) is TOC pointer in PPC64 ELF/AIX, system-reserved register in PPC32 SysV (AFAIK used as thread pointer in Linux/BSDs)
- r13(reserved for non-32-bit-AIX) is thread pointer in PPC64 ELF, small data area pointer register in PPC32 SysV, "reserved under 64-bit environment; not restored across system calls[^r13]" in AIX)
- As for FPSCR, volatile in PPC64 ELFv1/AIX, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv2.
- As for VR (Vector Registers), it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, v0-v19 are volatile in both in PPC64 ELF/AIX, v20-v31 are nonvolatile in PPC64 ELF, reserved or nonvolatile depending on the ABI ([vec-extabi vs vec-default in LLVM](https://reviews.llvm.org/D89684), we are [using vec-extabi](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131341#discussion_r1797693299)) in AIX:
> When the default Vector enabled mode is used, these registers are reserved and must not be used.
> In the extended ABI vector enabled mode, these registers are nonvolatile and their values are preserved across function calls
I left [FIXME comment about PPC32 SysV](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131341#discussion_r1790496095) and added ABI check for AIX.
- As for VRSAVE, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, nonvolatile in PPC64 ELFv1, reserved in PPC64 ELFv2/AIX
- As for VSCR, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv1, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC64 ELFv2, volatile in AIX
We are currently treating r1-r2, r13 (non-32-bit-AIX), r29-r31, LR, CTR, and VRSAVE as reserved.
We are currently not processing anything about FPSCR and VSCR, but I feel those are things that should be processed by `preserves_flags` rather than `clobber_abi` if we need to do something about them. (However, PPCRegisterInfo.td in LLVM does not seem to define anything about them.)
Replaces #111335 and #124279
cc `@ecnelises` `@bzEq` `@lu-zero`
r? `@Amanieu`
`@rustbot` label +O-PowerPC +A-inline-assembly
[^r13]: callee-saved, according to [LLVM](6a6af0246b/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCCallingConv.td (L322)) and [GCC](a9173a50e7/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.h (L859)).
This commit is the final step in the journey of renaming the historical
`wasm32-wasi` target in the Rust compiler to `wasm32-wasip1`. Various
steps in this journey so far have been:
* 2023-04-03: rust-lang/compiler-team#607 - initial proposal for this rename
* 2024-11-27: rust-lang/compiler-team#695 - amended schedule/procedure for rename
* 2024-01-29: rust-lang/rust#120468 - initial introduction of `wasm32-wasip1`
* 2024-06-18: rust-lang/rust#126662 - warn on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2024-11-08: this PR - remove the `wasm32-wasi` target
The full transition schedule is in [this comment][comment] and is
summarized with:
* 2024-05-02: Rust 1.78 released with `wasm32-wasip1` target
* 2024-09-05: Rust 1.81 released warning on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2025-01-09: Rust 1.84 to be released without the `wasm32-wasi` target
This means that support on stable for the replacement target of
`wasm32-wasip1` has currently been available for 6 months. Users have
already seen warnings on stable for 2 months about usage of
`wasm32-wasi` and stable users have another 2 months of warnings before
the target is removed from stable.
This commit is intended to be the final step in this transition so the
source tree should no longer mention `wasm32-wasi` except in historical
reference to the older name of the `wasm32-wasip1` target.
[comment]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120468#issuecomment-1977878747
Move versioned Apple LLVM targets from `rustc_target` to `rustc_codegen_ssa`
Fully specified LLVM targets contain the OS version on macOS/iOS/tvOS/watchOS/visionOS, and this version depends on the deployment target environment variables like `MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET`, `IPHONEOS_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET` etc.
We would like to move this to later in the compilation pipeline, both because it feels impure to access environment variables when fetching target information, but mostly because we need access to more information from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/130883 to do https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/118204. See also https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/129342#issuecomment-2335156119 for some discussion.
The first and second commit does the actual refactor, it should be a non-functional change, the third commit adds diagnostics for invalid deployment targets, which are now possible to do because we have access to the session.
Tested with the same commands as in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/130435.
r? ``````@petrochenkov``````
On some architectures, vector types may have a different ABI depending
on whether the relevant target features are enabled. (The ABI when the
feature is disabled is often not specified, but LLVM implements some
de-facto ABI.)
As discussed in rust-lang/lang-team#235, this turns out to very easily
lead to unsound code.
This commit makes it a post-monomorphization future-incompat warning to
declare or call functions using those vector types in a context in which
the corresponding target features are disabled, if using an ABI for
which the difference is relevant. This ensures that these functions are
always called with a consistent ABI.
See the [nomination comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/127731#issuecomment-2288558187)
for more discussion.
Part of #116558
The OS version depends on the deployment target environment variables,
the access of which we want to move to later in the compilation pipeline
that has access to more information, for example `env_depinfo`.
llvm: Match new LLVM 128-bit integer alignment on sparc
LLVM continues to align more 128-bit integers to 128-bits in the data layout rather than relying on the high level language to do it. Update SPARC target files to match and add a backcompat replacement for current LLVMs.
See llvm/llvm-project#106951 for details
`@rustbot` label: +llvm-main
r? `@durin42`
(Please wait for the LLVM CI to come back before approving), creating this PR to get it tested there.
compiler: Move `rustc_target::spec::abi::Abi` to `rustc_abi::ExternAbi`
Lift `enum Abi` from its rather odd place in the middle of rustc_target, and make it available again from rustc_abi. You know, the crate where you would expect the enum that describes all the ABIs to be? The platform-neutral ones, at least. This will help further refactoring of how we handle ABIs in the near future[^0].
Rename `Abi` to `ExternAbi` because quite a lot of the compiler overloads the concept of "ABI" enough that the existing name is imprecise and it is often renamed _anyway_. Often this was to avoid conflicts with the *other* type formerly known as `Abi` (now named BackendRepr[^1]), but sometimes it is just for clarity, and this name seems more self-explanatory. It does get reexported, though, using its old name, to reduce the odds of merge-conflicting over the entire tree.
All of `ExternAbi`'s friends come along for the ride, which costs adding some optional dependencies to the rustc_abi crate. However, all of this also allows simply moving three crates entirely off rustc_target:
- rustc_hir_pretty
- rustc_lint_defs
- rustc_mir_build
This odd selection is mostly to demonstrate a secondary motivation: The majority of the front-end of the compiler should be as target-agnostic as possible, and it is easier to assure this if they simply don't depend on the crate that describes targets. Note that I didn't migrate crates that don't benefit from it in this way yet, and I didn't survey every last crate.
[^0]: This is being undertaken as part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/119183
[^1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/132246
Fix `target_os` for `mipsel-sony-psx`
Previously set to `target_os = "none"` and `target_env = "psx"` in [the PR introducing the target](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/102689/), but although the Playstation 1 is _close_ to a bare metal target in some regards, it's still very much an operating system, so we should instead set `target_os = "psx"`.
This also matches the `mipsel-sony-psp` target, which sets `target_os = "psp"`.
CC target maintainer ``@ayrtonm.``
If there's any code out there that uses `cfg(target_env = "psx")`, they can use `cfg(any(target_os = "psx", target_env = "psx"))` until they bump their MSRV to a version where this is fully fixed.
LLVM continues to align more 128-bit integers to 128-bits in the data
layout rather than relying on the high level language to do it. Update
SPARC target files to match and add a backcompat replacement for current
LLVMs.
See llvm/llvm-project#106951 for details
Add `lp64e` RISC-V ABI
This PR adds support for the `lp64e` RISC-V ABI, which is the 64-bit equivalent of the `ilp32e` ABI that is already supported.
For reference, this ABI was originally added to LLVM in [this PR](https://reviews.llvm.org/D70401).
The initial naming of "Abi" was an awful mistake, conveying wrong ideas
about how psABIs worked and even more about what the enum meant.
It was only meant to represent the way the value would be described to
a codegen backend as it was lowered to that intermediate representation.
It was never meant to mean anything about the actual psABI handling!
The conflation is because LLVM typically will associate a certain form
with a certain ABI, but even that does not hold when the special cases
that actually exist arise, plus the IR annotations that modify the ABI.
Reframe `rustc_abi::Abi` as the `BackendRepr` of the type, and rename
`BackendRepr::Aggregate` as `BackendRepr::Memory`. Unfortunately, due to
the persistent misunderstandings, this too is now incorrect:
- Scattered ABI-relevant code is entangled with BackendRepr
- We do not always pre-compute a correct BackendRepr that reflects how
we "actually" want this value to be handled, so we leave the backend
interface to also inject various special-cases here
- In some cases `BackendRepr::Memory` is a "real" aggregate, but in
others it is in fact using memory, and in some cases it is a scalar!
Our rustc-to-backend lowering code handles this sort of thing right now.
That will eventually be addressed by lifting duplicated lowering code
to either rustc_codegen_ssa or rustc_target as appropriate.
This commit adds a new rustc target feature named `wide-arithmetic` for
WebAssembly targets. This corresponds to the [wide-arithmetic] proposal
for WebAssembly which adds new instructions catered towards accelerating
integer arithmetic larger than 64-bits. This proposal to WebAssembly is
not standard yet so this new feature is flagged as an unstable target
feature. Additionally Rust's LLVM version doesn't support this new
feature yet since support will first be added in LLVM 20, so the
feature filtering logic for LLVM is updated to handle this.
I'll also note that I'm not currently planning to add wasm-specific
intrinsics to `std::arch::wasm32` at this time. The currently proposed
instructions are all accessible through `i128` or `u128`-based
operations which Rust already supports, so intrinsic shouldn't be
necessary to get access to these new instructions.
[wide-arithmetic]: https://github.com/WebAssembly/wide-arithmetic
rustc_target: Add pauth-lr aarch64 target feature
Add the pauth-lr target feature, corresponding to aarch64 FEAT_PAuth_LR. This feature has been added in LLVM 19.
It is currently not supported by the Linux hwcap and so we cannot add runtime feature detection for it at this time.
r? `@Amanieu`
Emit future-incompatibility lint when calling/declaring functions with vectors that require missing target feature
On some architectures, vector types may have a different ABI depending on whether the relevant target features are enabled. (The ABI when the feature is disabled is often not specified, but LLVM implements some de-facto ABI.)
As discussed in https://github.com/rust-lang/lang-team/issues/235, this turns out to very easily lead to unsound code.
This commit makes it a post-monomorphization error to declare or call functions using those vector types in a context in which the corresponding target features are disabled, if using an ABI for which the difference is relevant. This ensures that these functions are always called with a consistent ABI.
See the [nomination comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/127731#issuecomment-2288558187) for more discussion.
r? RalfJung
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116558
On some architectures, vector types may have a different ABI when
relevant target features are enabled.
As discussed in https://github.com/rust-lang/lang-team/issues/235, this
turns out to very easily lead to unsound code.
This commit makes it an error to declare or call functions using those
vector types in a context in which the corresponding target features are
disabled, if using an ABI for which the difference is relevant.
Fix `target_vendor` in QNX Neutrino targets
The `x86_64-pc-nto-qnx710` and `i586-pc-nto-qnx700` targets have `pc` in their target triple names, but the vendor was set to the default `"unknown"`.
CC target maintainers `@flba-eb,` `@gh-tr,` `@jonathanpallant` and `@japaric`
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #130991 (Vectorized SliceContains)
- #131928 (rustdoc: Document `markdown` module.)
- #131955 (Set `signext` or `zeroext` for integer arguments on RISC-V and LoongArch64)
- #131979 (Minor tweaks to `compare_impl_item.rs`)
- #132036 (Add a test case for #131164)
- #132039 (Specialize `read_exact` and `read_buf_exact` for `VecDeque`)
- #132060 ("innermost", "outermost", "leftmost", and "rightmost" don't need hyphens)
- #132065 (Clarify documentation of `ptr::dangling()` function)
- #132066 (Fix a typo in documentation of `pointer::sub_ptr()`)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
terminology: #[feature] *enables* a feature (instead of "declaring" or "activating" it)
Mostly, we currently call a feature that has a corresponding `#[feature(name)]` attribute in the current crate a "declared" feature. I think that is confusing as it does not align with what "declaring" usually means. Furthermore, we *also* refer to `#[stable]`/`#[unstable]` as *declaring* a feature (e.g. in [these diagnostics](f25e5abea2/compiler/rustc_passes/messages.ftl (L297-L301))), which aligns better with what "declaring" usually means. To make things worse, the functions `tcx.features().active(...)` and `tcx.features().declared(...)` both exist and they are doing almost the same thing (testing whether a corresponding `#[feature(name)]` exists) except that `active` would ICE if the feature is not an unstable lang feature. On top of this, the callback when a feature is activated/declared is called `set_enabled`, and many comments also talk about "enabling" a feature.
So really, our terminology is just a mess.
I would suggest we use "declaring a feature" for saying that something is/was guarded by a feature (e.g. `#[stable]`/`#[unstable]`), and "enabling a feature" for `#[feature(name)]`. This PR implements that.
Always specify `llvm_abiname` for RISC-V targets
For RISC-V targets, when `llvm_abiname` is not specified LLVM will infer the ABI from the target features, causing #116344 to occur. This PR adds the correct `llvm_abiname` to all RISC-V targets where it is missing (which are all soft-float targets), and adds a test to prevent future RISC-V targets from accidentally omitting `llvm_abiname`. The only affect of this PR is that `-Ctarget-feature=+f` (or similar) will no longer affect the ABI on the modified targets.
<!-- homu-ignore:start -->
r? `@RalfJung`
<!--- homu-ignore:end -->
rust_for_linux: -Zregparm=<N> commandline flag for X86 (#116972)
Command line flag `-Zregparm=<N>` for X86 (32-bit) for rust-for-linux: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116972
Implemented in the similar way as fastcall/vectorcall support (args are marked InReg if fit).
Migrate `llvm::set_comdat` and `llvm::SetUniqueComdat` to LLVM-C FFI.
Note, now we can call `llvm::set_comdat` only when the target actually
supports adding comdat. As this has no convenient LLVM-C API, we
implement this as `TargetOptions::supports_comdat`.
Co-authored-by: Stuart Cook <Zalathar@users.noreply.github.com>
Setting up indirect access to external data for loongarch64-linux-{musl,ohos}
In issue #118053, the `loongarch64-unknown-linux-gnu` target needs indirection to access external data, and so do the `loongarch64-unknown-linux-musl` and `loongarch64-unknown-linux-ohos` targets.
Add the pauth-lr target feature, corresponding to aarch64 FEAT_PAuth_LR.
This feature has been added in LLVM 19.
It is currently not supported by the Linux hwcap and so we cannot add
runtime feature detection for it at this time.
LLVM has added 3 new address spaces to support special Windows use
cases. These shouldn't trouble us for now, but LLVM requires matching
data layouts.
See llvm/llvm-project#111879 for details
Fix clobber_abi and disallow SVE-related registers in Arm64EC inline assembly
Currently `clobber_abi` in Arm64EC inline assembly is implemented using `InlineAsmClobberAbi::AArch64NoX18`, but broken since it attempts to clobber registers that cannot be used in Arm64EC: https://godbolt.org/z/r3PTrGz5r
```
error: cannot use register `x13`: x13, x14, x23, x24, x28, v16-v31 cannot be used for Arm64EC
--> <source>:6:14
|
6 | asm!("", clobber_abi("C"), options(nostack, nomem, preserves_flags));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: cannot use register `x14`: x13, x14, x23, x24, x28, v16-v31 cannot be used for Arm64EC
--> <source>:6:14
|
6 | asm!("", clobber_abi("C"), options(nostack, nomem, preserves_flags));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<omitted the same errors for v16-v31>
```
Additionally, this disallows SVE-related registers per https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131332#issuecomment-2401189142.
cc ``@dpaoliello``
r? ``@Amanieu``
``@rustbot`` label O-windows O-AArch64 +A-inline-assembly
compiler: `{TyAnd,}Layout` comes home
The `Layout` and `TyAndLayout` types are heavily abstract and have no particular target-specific qualities, though we do use them to answer questions particular to targets. We can keep it that way if we simply move them out of `rustc_target` and into `rustc_abi`. They bring a small entourage of connected types with them, but that's fine.
This will allow us to strengthen a few abstraction barriers over time and thus make the notoriously gnarly layout code easier to refactor. For now, we don't need to worry about that and deliberately use reexports to minimize this particular diff.
In issue #118053, the `loongarch64-unknown-linux-gnu` target needs indirection
to access external data, and so do the `loongarch64-unknown-linux-musl` and
`loongarch64-unknown-linux-ohos` targets.
Support clobber_abi in MSP430 inline assembly
This supports `clobber_abi` which is one of the requirements of stabilization mentioned in #93335.
Refs: Section 3.2 "Register Conventions" in [MSP430 Embedded Application Binary Interface](https://www.ti.com/lit/an/slaa534a/slaa534a.pdf)
cc ``@cr1901``
r? ``@Amanieu``
``@rustbot`` label +O-msp430
ABI: Pass aggregates by value on AIX
On AIX we pass aggregates byval. Adds new ABI for AIX for powerpc64.
313ad85dfa/clang/lib/CodeGen/Targets/PPC.cpp (L216)
Fixes the following 2 testcases on AIX:
```
tests/ui/abi/extern/extern-pass-TwoU16s.rs
tests/ui/abi/extern/extern-pass-TwoU8s.rs
```
LLVM 20 split out what used to be called b16b16 and correspond to aarch64
FEAT_SVE_B16B16 into sve-b16b16 and sme-b16b16.
Add sme-b16b16 as an explicit feature and update the codegen accordingly.
Fix `target_vendor` in non-IDF Xtensa ESP32 targets
`rustc`'s Xtensa ESP32 targets are the following:
- `xtensa-esp32-none-elf`
- `xtensa-esp32-espidf`
- `xtensa-esp32s2-none-elf`
- `xtensa-esp32s2-espidf`
- `xtensa-esp32s3-none-elf`
- `xtensa-esp32s3-espidf`
The ESP-IDF targets already set `target_vendor="espressif"`, however, the ESP32 is, from my understanding, produced by Espressif regardless of whether using the IDF or not, so we should set the target vendor there as well?
Fix `target_abi` in `sparc-unknown-none-elf`
This was previously set to `target_abi = "elf"`, but `elf` is not used elsewhere as a target ABI (even though there's many targets that have it in their name), so I've removed it.
CC target maintainer ``@jonathanpallant,`` what do you think about this?
``@rustbot`` label O-SPARC
Fix `target_env` in `avr-unknown-gnu-atmega328`
The target name itself contains GNU, we should probably reflect that as `target_env = "gnu"` as well? Or from my reading of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74941#issuecomment-712219034, perhaps not, but then that should probably be documented somewhere?
There's no listed target maintainer, but the target was introduced in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74941, so I'll ping the author of that: `@dylanmckay`
Relatedly, I wonder _why_ the recommendation is to [create separate target triples for each AVR](https://github.com/Rahix/avr-hal/tree/main/avr-specs), when `-Ctarget-cpu=...` would suffice, perhaps you could also elaborate on that? Was it just because `-Ctarget-cpu=...` didn't exist back then? If so, now that it does, should we now change the target back to e.g. `avr-unknown-none-gnu`, and require the user to set `-Ctarget-cpu=...` instead?
Add x86_64-unknown-trusty as tier 3 target
This PR adds a third target for the Trusty platform, `x86_64-unknown-trusty`.
Please let me know if an MCP is required. https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/582 was made when adding the first two targets, I can make another one for the new target as well if needed.
# Target Tier Policy Acknowledgements
> 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.)
- Nicole LeGare (```@randomPoison)```
- Andrei Homescu (```@ahomescu)```
- Chris Wailes (chriswailes@google.com)
- As a fallback trusty-dev-team@google.com can be contacted
Note that this does not reflect the maintainers currently listed in [`trusty.md`](c52c23b6f4/src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/trusty.md). #130452 is currently open to update the list of maintainers in the documentation.
> 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.
The new target `x86_64-unknown-trusty` follows the existing naming convention for similar 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.
👍
> 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.
There are no known legal issues or license incompatibilities.
> 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.
👍
> 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.
This PR only adds the target. `std` support is being worked on and will be added in a future 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 binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target, using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
👍
> 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.
👍
> 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.
👍
> Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of rustc's supported backends from any host target. (Having support in a fork of the backend is not sufficient, it must be upstream.)
👍
This was previously set to `target_abi = "elf"`, but `elf` is not used
elsewhere as a target ABI (even though there's many targets that have it
in their name).
