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
Add new `{x86_64,i686}-win7-windows-gnu` targets
These are in symmetry with `{x86_64,i686}-win7-windows-msvc`.
> ## Tier 3 target policy
>
> At this tier, the Rust project provides no official support for a target, so we
> place minimal requirements on the introduction of targets.
>
> A proposed new tier 3 target must be reviewed and approved by a member of the
> compiler team based on these requirements. The reviewer may choose to gauge
> broader compiler team consensus via a [Major Change Proposal (MCP)][https://forge.rust-lang.org/compiler/mcp.html].
>
> A proposed target or target-specific patch that substantially changes code
> shared with other targets (not just target-specific code) must be reviewed and
> approved by the appropriate team for that shared code before acceptance.
>
> - 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.)
This is me, `@tbu-` on github.
> - 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.
> - 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.
Consistent with `{x86_64,i686}-win7-windows-msvc`, see also #118150.
> - 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 must not introduce license incompatibilities.
> - Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust
> license (`MIT OR Apache-2.0`).
> - The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other
> host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend
> on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This
> applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding
> new license exceptions (as specified by the `tidy` tool in the
> rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library
> or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a
> user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be
> subject to any new license requirements.
> - 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.
> - "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.
AFAICT, it's the same legal situation as the tier 1 `{x86_64,i686}-pc-windows-gnu`.
> - 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.
This target supports the whole libstd surface, since it's essentially reusing all of the x86_64-pc-windows-gnu target. Understood.
> - 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 tried to write some documentation on that.
> - 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.
> - 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.)
Understood.
> If a tier 3 target stops meeting these requirements, or the target maintainers
> no longer have interest or time, or the target shows no signs of activity and
> has not built for some time, or removing the target would improve the quality
> of the Rust codebase, we may post a PR to remove it; any such PR will be CCed
> to the target maintainers (and potentially other people who have previously
> worked on the target), to check potential interest in improving the situation.
>
Understood.
r? compiler-team
arm: add unstable soft-float target feature
This has an actual usecase as mentioned [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116344#issuecomment-2575324988), and with my recent ARM float ABI changes there shouldn't be any soundness concerns any more. We will reject enabling this feature on `hf` targets, but disabling it on non-`hf` targets is entirely fine -- the target feature refers to whether softfloat emulation is used for float instructions, and is independent of the ABI which we set separately via `llvm_floatabi`.
Cc ``@workingjubilee``
add m68k-unknown-none-elf target
r? `@workingjubilee`
The existing `m68k-unknown-linux-gnu` target builds `std` by default, requires atomics, and has a base cpu with an fpu. A smaller/more embedded target is desirable both to have a baseline target for the ISA, as well to make debugging easier for working on the llvm backend. Currently this target is using the `M68010` as the minimum CPU due, but as missing features are merged into the `M68k` llvm backend I am hoping to lower this further.
I have been able to build very small crates using a toolchain built against this target (together with a later version of `object`) using the configuration described in the target platform-support documentation, although getting anything of substantial complexity to build quickly hits errors in the llvm backend
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`
Target: Add mips mti baremetal support
Do the same thing as gcc, which use the vendor `mti` to mark the toolchain as MIPS32r2 default.
We support both big endian and little endian flavor:
mips-mti-none-elf
mipsel-mti-none-elf
Do the same thing as gcc, which use the vendor `mti` to mark
the toolchain as MIPS32r2 default.
We support both big endian and little endian flavor:
mips-mti-none-elf
mipsel-mti-none-elf
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.
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`
