Add x86_64-unknown-linux-none target
Adds a freestanding linux binary with no libc dependency. This is useful for writing programs written only in rust. It is also essential for writing low level stuff like libc or a dynamic linker.
Tier 3 policy:
>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.)
I will be the designed maintainer for this target
>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 target triple is consistent with other 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.
If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name. Periods (.) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
There is no confusion with other targets since it explicitly adds "none" at the end instead of omitting the environment
>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.
The target does not introduce any unusual requirement
>The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
There are no license incompatibilities
> Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license (MIT OR Apache-2.0).
Everything added is under that license
>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.
There are no new dependencies
>Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other code for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling from another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries. Host tools built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications built for the target, but those libraries must not be required for code generation for the target; cross-compilation to the target must not require such libraries at all. 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.
There is no proprietary dependencies
>"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.
No such terms exist for this target
>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.
Understood
>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.
The target already implements core. It might be possible in the future to add support for alloc and std by leveraging crates such as [origin](https://github.com/sunfishcode/origin/) and [rustix](https://github.com/bytecodealliance/rustix)
> 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.
I believe the proper docs are added
>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.
Understood
> 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 are effected
>Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of rustc's supported backends from any host target.
The same backends used by other linux targets work without issues
Warn against changes in opaque lifetime captures in 2024
Adds a (mostly[^1]) machine-applicable lint `IMPL_TRAIT_OVERCAPTURES` which detects cases where we will capture more lifetimes in edition 2024 than in edition <= 2021, which may lead to erroneous borrowck errors.
This lint is gated behind the `precise_capturing` feature gate and marked `Allow` for now.
[^1]: Except when there are APITs -- I may work on that soon
r? oli-obk
Rollup of 4 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #116675 ([ptr] Document maximum allocation size)
- #124997 (Fix ICE while casting a type with error)
- #125072 (Add test for dynamic dispatch + Pin::new soundness)
- #125090 (Migrate fuchsia docs from `pm` to `ffx`)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Remove `NtIdent` and `NtLifetime`
This is one part of the bigger "remove `Nonterminal` and `TokenKind::Interpolated`" change drafted in #114647. More details in the individual commit messages.
r? `@petrochenkov`
Split out `ty::AliasTerm` from `ty::AliasTy`
Splitting out `AliasTerm` (for use in project and normalizes goals) and `AliasTy` (for use in `ty::Alias`)
r? lcnr
Rewrite 3 very similar `run-make` alloc tests to rmake
Part of #121876#121918 attempted to port these 3 tests 2 months ago. However, since then, the structure of `run-make-support` has changed a bit and new helper functions were added. Since there has been no activity on the PR, they are good low-hanging fruit to knock down, using the new functions of the current library.
There is also the removal of a useless import on a very similar test.
Unify `Rvalue::Aggregate` paths in cg_ssa
In #123840 and #123886 I added two different codepaths for `Rvalue::Aggregate` in `cg_ssa`.
This merges them into one, since raw pointers are also immediates that can be built from the immediates of their "fields".
This span records the declaration of the metavariable in the LHS of the macro.
It's used in a couple of error messages. Unfortunately, it gets in the way of
the long-term goal of removing `TokenKind::Interpolated`. So this commit
removes it, which degrades a couple of (obscure) error messages but makes
things simpler and enables the next commit.
Pretty-print let-else with added parenthesization when needed
Rustc used to produce invalid syntax for the following code, which is problematic because it means we cannot apply rustfmt to the output of `-Zunpretty=expanded`.
```rust
macro_rules! expr {
($e:expr) => { $e };
}
fn main() {
let _ = expr!(loop {}) else { return; };
}
```
```console
$ rustc repro.rs -Zunpretty=expanded | rustfmt
error: `loop...else` loops are not supported
--> <stdin>:9:29
|
9 | fn main() { let _ = loop {} else { return; }; }
| ---- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| |
| `else` is attached to this loop
|
= note: consider moving this `else` clause to a separate `if` statement and use a `bool` variable to control if it should run
```
Unfortunately, we can't always offer a machine-applicable suggestion when there are subpatterns from macro expansion.
Co-Authored-By: Guillaume Boisseau <Nadrieril@users.noreply.github.com>
Fix some minor issues from the ui-test auto-porting
I'm not sure if these count as false positives, because well, starting a comment with `// incremental` was probably a valid compiletest directive.
But anyway, these tests directives became clearly goofy and now with the better syntax we can straighten things out.
r? jieyouxu
Migrate rustdoc scrape examples ordering
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121876.
This one adds a lot of utility methods/functions. To prevent having too much changes at once, I didn't make the existing rmake tests use these yet but I'll send a follow-up so they all use it.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Fix, document, and test parser and pretty-printer edge cases related to braced macro calls
_Review note: this is a deceptively small PR because it comes with 145 lines of docs and 196 lines of tests, and only 25 lines of compiler code changed. However, I recommend reviewing it 1 commit at a time because much of the effect of the code changes is non-local i.e. affecting code that is not visible in the final state of the PR. I have paid attention that reviewing the PR one commit at a time is as easy as I can make it. All of the code you need to know about is touched in those commits, even if some of those changes disappear by the end of the stack._
This is a follow-up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/119105. One case that is not relevant to `-Zunpretty=expanded`, but which came up as I'm porting #119105 and #118726 into `syn`'s printer and `prettyplease`'s printer where it **is** relevant, and is also relevant to rustc's `stringify!`, is statement boundaries in the vicinity of braced macro calls.
Rustc's AST pretty-printer produces invalid syntax for statements that begin with a braced macro call:
```rust
macro_rules! stringify_item {
($i:item) => {
stringify!($i)
};
}
macro_rules! repro {
($e:expr) => {
stringify_item!(fn main() { $e + 1; })
};
}
fn main() {
println!("{}", repro!(m! {}));
}
```
**Before this PR:** output is not valid Rust syntax.
```console
fn main() { m! {} + 1; }
```
```console
error: leading `+` is not supported
--> <anon>:1:19
|
1 | fn main() { m! {} + 1; }
| ^ unexpected `+`
|
help: try removing the `+`
|
1 - fn main() { m! {} + 1; }
1 + fn main() { m! {} 1; }
|
```
**After this PR:** valid syntax.
```console
fn main() { (m! {}) + 1; }
```
The change to the test is a little goofy because the compiler was
guessing "correctly" before that `falsy! {}` is the condition as opposed
to the else body. But I believe this change is fundamentally correct.
Braced macro invocations in statement position are most often item-like
(`thread_local! {...}`) as opposed to parenthesized macro invocations
which are condition-like (`cfg!(...)`).
Always hide private fields in aliased type
This PR adds a new rustdoc pass that unconditionally always strips all private fields in aliased type, since showing them, even with `--document-private-items`, is confusing, unhelpful, and run backwards to the "Aliased type" feature, which is to show the type as it would be seen by the user.
r? ```@GuillaumeGomez```
Fixes#124938Fixes#123860
Clean up users of rust_dbg_call
`rust_dbg_call` is a C test helper that until this PR was declared in C with `void*` arguments and used in Rust _mostly_ with `libc::uintptr_t` arguments. Nearly every user just wants to pass integers around, so I've changed all users to `uint64_t` or `u64`.
The single test that actually used the pointer-ness of the argument is a test for ensuring that Rust can make extern calls outside of tasks. Rust hasn't had tasks for quite a few years now, so I'm deleting that test under the same logic as the test deleted in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124073
