Stop sorting `Span`s' `SyntaxContext`, as that is incompatible with incremental
work towards https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90317
Luckily no one actually needed these to be sorted, so it didn't even affect diagnostics. I'm guessing they'd have been sorted by creation time anyway, so it wouldn't really have mattered.
r? `@cjgillot`
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #126125 (Improve conflict marker recovery)
- #126481 (Add `powerpc-unknown-openbsd` maintenance status)
- #126613 (Print the tested value in int_log tests)
- #126617 (Expand `avx512_target_feature` to include VEX variants)
- #126700 (Make edition dependent `:expr` macro fragment act like the edition-dependent `:pat` fragment does)
- #126707 (Pass target to inaccessible-temp-dir rmake test)
- #126767 (`StaticForeignItem` and `StaticItem` are the same)
- #126774 (Fix another assertion failure for some Expect diagnostics.)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
More ptr metadata gvn
There's basically 3 parts to this PR.
1. Allow references as arguments to `UnOp::PtrMetadata`
This is a MIR semantics addition, so
r? mir
Rather than just raw pointers, also allow references to be passed to `PtrMetadata`. That means the length of a slice can be just `PtrMetadata(_1)` instead of also needing a ref-to-pointer statement (`_2 = &raw *_1` + `PtrMetadata(_2)`).
AFAIK there should be no provenance or tagging implications of looking at the *metadata* of a pointer, and the code in the backends actually already supported it (other than a debug assert, given that they don't care about ptr vs reference, really), so we might as well allow it.
2. Simplify the argument to `PtrMetadata` in GVN
Because the specific kind of pointer-like thing isn't that important, GVN can simplify all those details away. Things like `*const`-to-`*mut` casts and `&mut`-to-`&` reborrows are irrelevant, and skipping them lets it see more interesting things.
cc `@cjgillot`
Notably, unsizing casts for arrays. GVN supported that for `Len`, and now it sees it for `PtrMetadata` as well, allowing `PtrMetadata(pointer)` to become a constant if that pointer came from an array-to-slice unsizing, even through a bunch of other possible steps.
3. Replace `NormalizeArrayLen` with GVN
The `NormalizeArrayLen` pass hasn't been running even in optimized builds for well over a year, and it turns out that GVN -- which *is* on in optimized builds -- can do everything it was trying to do.
So the code for the pass is deleted, but the tests are kept, just changed to the different pass.
As part of this, `LowerSliceLen` was changed to emit `PtrMetadata(_1)` instead of `Len(*_1)`, a small step on the road to eventually eliminating `Rvalue::Len`.
Fix another assertion failure for some Expect diagnostics.
Very similar to #126719. So much so that I added a new case to the test from that PR rather than creating a new one.
r? `@oli-obk`
`StaticForeignItem` and `StaticItem` are the same
The struct `StaticItem` and `StaticForeignItem` are the same, so remove `StaticForeignItem`. Having them be separate is unique to `static` items -- unlike `ForeignItemKind::{Fn,TyAlias}`, which use the normal AST item.
r? ``@spastorino`` or ``@oli-obk``
Make edition dependent `:expr` macro fragment act like the edition-dependent `:pat` fragment does
Parse the `:expr` fragment as `:expr_2021` in editions <=2021, and as `:expr` in edition 2024. This is similar to how we parse `:pat` as `:pat_param` in edition <=2018 and `:pat_with_or` in >=2021, and means we can get rid of a span dependency from `nonterminal_may_begin_with`.
Specifically, this fixes a theoretical regression since the `expr_2021` macro fragment previously would allow `const {}` if the *caller* is edition 2024. This is inconsistent with the way that the `pat` macro fragment was upgraded, and also leads to surprising behavior when a macro *caller* crate upgrades to edtion 2024, since they may have parsing changes that they never asked for (with no way of opting out of it).
This PR also allows using `expr_2021` in all editions. Why was this was disallowed in the first place? It's purely additive, and also it's still feature gated?
r? ```@fmease``` ```@eholk``` cc ```@vincenzopalazzo```
cc #123865
Tracking:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123742
Expand `avx512_target_feature` to include VEX variants
Added 5 new target features for x86:
- `AVX-IFMA`
- `AVX-NE-CONVERT`
- `AVX-VNNI`
- `AVX-VNNI_INT8`
- `AVX-VNNI_INT16`
Both LLVM and GCC already have support for these.
See also the [stdarch PR](https://github.com/rust-lang/stdarch/pull/1586)
Print the tested value in int_log tests
Tiny change - from the failures in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/125016, it would have been nice to see what the tested values were. Update the assertion messages.
Add `powerpc-unknown-openbsd` maintenance status
As noted in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/126451#issuecomment-2167211749 `powerpc-unknown-openbsd` is not maintained by the OpenBSD devs. If a maintainer is found this can be updated with their information but we should document the current status and note explicitly that it's different from other OpenBSD targets.
Improve conflict marker recovery
<!--
If this PR is related to an unstable feature or an otherwise tracked effort,
please link to the relevant tracking issue here. If you don't know of a related
tracking issue or there are none, feel free to ignore this.
This PR will get automatically assigned to a reviewer. In case you would like
a specific user to review your work, you can assign it to them by using
r? <reviewer name>
-->
closes#113826
r? ```@estebank``` since you reviewed #115413
cc: ```@rben01``` since you opened up the issue in the first place
`PtrMetadata` doesn't care about `*const`/`*mut`/`&`/`&mut`, so GVN away those casts in its argument.
This includes updating MIR to allow calling PtrMetadata on references too, not just raw pointers. That means that `[T]::len` can be just `_0 = PtrMetadata(_1)`, for example.
# Conflicts:
# tests/mir-opt/pre-codegen/slice_index.slice_get_unchecked_mut_range.PreCodegen.after.panic-abort.mir
# tests/mir-opt/pre-codegen/slice_index.slice_get_unchecked_mut_range.PreCodegen.after.panic-unwind.mir
Properly gate `safe` keyword in pre-expansion
This PR gates `safe` keyword in pre-expansion contexts. Should mitigate the fallout of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/126755, which is that `safe` is now usable on beta lol.
r? `@spastorino` or `@oli-obk`
cc #124482 tracking #123743
Account for things that optimize out in inlining costs
This updates the MIR inlining `CostChecker` to have both bonuses and penalties, rather than just penalties.
That lets us add bonuses for some things where we want to encourage inlining without risking wrapping into a gigantic cost. For example, `switchInt(const …)` we give an inlining bonus because codegen will actually eliminate the branch (and associated dead blocks) once it's monomorphized, so measuring both sides of the branch gives an unrealistically-high cost to it. Similarly, an `unreachable` terminator gets a small bonus, because whatever branch leads there doesn't actually exist post-codegen.
Replace sort implementations
This PR replaces the sort implementations with tailor-made ones that strike a balance of run-time, compile-time and binary-size, yielding run-time and compile-time improvements. Regressing binary-size for `slice::sort` while improving it for `slice::sort_unstable`. All while upholding the existing soft and hard safety guarantees, and even extending the soft guarantees, detecting strict weak ordering violations with a high chance and reporting it to users via a panic.
* `slice::sort` -> driftsort [design document](https://github.com/Voultapher/sort-research-rs/blob/main/writeup/driftsort_introduction/text.md), includes detailed benchmarks and analysis.
* `slice::sort_unstable` -> ipnsort [design document](https://github.com/Voultapher/sort-research-rs/blob/main/writeup/ipnsort_introduction/text.md), includes detailed benchmarks and analysis.
#### Why should we change the sort implementations?
In the [2023 Rust survey](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/02/19/2023-Rust-Annual-Survey-2023-results.html#challenges), one of the questions was: "In your opinion, how should work on the following aspects of Rust be prioritized?". The second place was "Runtime performance" and the third one "Compile Times". This PR aims to improve both.
#### Why is this one big PR and not multiple?
* The current documentation gives performance recommendations for `slice::sort` and `slice::sort_unstable`. If for example only one of them were to be changed, this advice would be misleading for some Rust versions. By replacing them atomically, the advice remains largely unchanged, and users don't have to change their code.
* driftsort and ipnsort share a substantial part of their implementations.
* The implementation of `select_nth_unstable` uses internals of `slice::sort_unstable`, which makes it impractical to split changes.
---
This PR is a collaboration with `@orlp.`
add `needs-unwind` to UI test
the `tail-expr-lock-poisoning` UI test uses the `panic::catch_unwind` API so it relies on unwinding being implemented. this test ought not to run on targets that do not support unwinding. add the `needs-unwind` attribute to signal this
Remove `feature(const_closures)` from libcore
This is an incomplete feature and apparently it has no uses in `core`. Incomplete features should generally not be used in our standard library.
collect attrs in const block expr
Fixes#126516Fixes#126647
It was forgotten to collect these attributes in the const block expression.
r? `@petrochenkov`
Rewrite `extern-flag-rename-transitive`. `debugger-visualizer-dep-info`, `metadata-flag-frobs-symbols`, `extern-overrides-distribution` and `forced-unwind-terminate-pof` `run-make` tests to rmake
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
try-job: dist-x86_64-apple
Migrate `link-args-order`, `ls-metadata` and `lto-readonly-lib` `run-make` tests to `rmake`
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
Guaranteed to fail CI until #125736 gets merged. Will require addition of `fs_wrapper::set_permissions` in the associated module.
try-job: x86_64-msvc
The previous message omits which of the dozens of tools called tidy is
meant. And it's written in a way that one can easily miss the *not*,
thinking it reads "Note that `tidy` is the in-tree `src/tools/tidy` but
needs to be installed". The error message should hopefully help future
contributors.
the `tail-expr-lock-poisoning` UI test uses the `panic::catch_unwind`
API so it relies on unwinding being implemented. this test ought not to
run on targets that do not support unwinding. add the `needs-unwind`
attribute to signal this
Add opaque type corner case test
r? ``@lcnr``
I can't make sense of the new solver tracing logs yet, so I just added the test without explanation.
The old solver does not yet figure out that `Foo == ()` from the where bounds. Unfortunately, even if we make it understand that, it will later try to prove `<X as Trait<'static>>::Out<Foo>: Sized` via the `is_sized_raw` query, which does not take a list of defineable opaque types, causing that check to fail with an ICE.
Thus I'm submitting this test case on its own just to ensure we handle it correctly in the future with any new solver or old solver changes.
Fix assertion failure for some `Expect` diagnostics.
In #120699 I moved some code dealing with `has_future_breakage` earlier in `emit_diagnostic`. Issue #126521 identified a case where that reordering was invalid (leading to an assertion failure) for some `Expect` diagnostics.
This commit partially undoes the change, by moving the handling of unstable `Expect` diagnostics earlier again. This makes `emit_diagnostic` a bit uglier, but is necessary to fix the problem.
Fixes#126521.
r? ``@oli-obk``
Clean up some comments near `use` declarations
#125443 will reformat all `use` declarations in the repository. There are a few edge cases involving comments on `use` declarations that require care. This PR cleans up some clumsy comment cases, taking us a step closer to #125443 being able to merge.
r? ``@lqd``
