Add support for MIPS VZ ISA extension
[Link to relevant LLVM line where virt extension is specified](83fab8cee9/llvm/lib/Target/Mips/Mips.td (L172-L173))
This has been tested on mips-unknown-linux-musl with a target-cpu that is >= MIPS32 5 and `target-features=+virt`. The example was checked in a disassembler to ensure the correct assembly sequence was being generated using the virtualization instructions.
Needed additional work:
* MIPS is missing from [the Rust reference CPU feature lists](https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/attributes/codegen.html#available-features)
Example docs for later:
```md
#### `mips` or `mips64`
This platform requires that `#[target_feature]` is only applied to [`unsafe`
functions][unsafe function]. This target's feature support is currently unstable
and must be enabled by `#![feature(mips_target_feature)]` ([Issue #44839])
[Issue #44839]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44839
Further documentation on these features can be found in the [MIPS Instruction Set
Reference Manual], or elsewhere on [mips.com].
[MIPS Instruction Set Reference Manual]: https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/downloads-mips/documents/MD00086-2B-MIPS32BIS-AFP-6.06.pdf
[developer.arm.com]: https://www.mips.com/products/architectures/ase/
Feature | Implicitly Enables | Description
---------------|--------------------|-------------------
`fp64` | | 64-bit Floating Point
`msa` | | "MIPS SIMD Architecture"
`virt` | | Virtualization instructions (VZ ASE)
```
If the above is good I can also submit a PR for that if there's interest in documenting it while it's still unstable. Otherwise that can be dropped, I just wrote it before realizing it was possibly not a good idea.
Relevant to #44839
https://reviews.llvm.org/D120026 changed atomics on thumbv6m to
use libatomic, to ensure that atomic load/store are compatible with
atomic RMW/CAS. However, Rust wants to expose only load/store
without libcalls.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D130480 added support for this behind
the +atomics-32 target feature, so enable that feature.
Inline assembly uses the target features to determine which registers
are available on the current target. However it needs to be able to
access unstable target features for this.
Fixes#99071
Arm's FEAT_FP and Feat_AdvSIMD describe the same thing on AArch64:
The Neon unit, which handles both floating point and SIMD instructions.
Moreover, a configuration for AArch64 must include both or neither.
Arm says "entirely proprietary" toolchains may omit floating point:
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/102374/0101/Data-processing---floating-point
In the Programmer's Guide for Armv8-A, Arm says AArch64 can have
both FP and Neon or neither in custom implementations:
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/den0024/a/AArch64-Floating-point-and-NEON
In "Bare metal boot code for Armv8-A", enabling Neon and FP
is just disabling the same trap flag:
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/dai0527/a
In an unlikely future where "Neon and FP" become unrelated,
we can add "[+-]fp" as its own feature flag.
Until then, we can simplify programming with Rust on AArch64 by
folding both into "[+-]neon", which is valid as it supersets both.
"[+-]neon" is retained for niche uses such as firmware, kernels,
"I just hate floats", and so on.
Direct users towards using Rust target feature names in CLI
This PR consists of a couple of changes on how we handle target features.
In particular there is a bug-fix wherein we avoid passing through features that aren't prefixed by `+` or `-` to LLVM. These appear to be causing LLVM to assert, which is pretty poor a behaviour (and also makes it pretty clear we expect feature names to be prefixed).
The other commit, I anticipate to be somewhat more controversial is outputting a warning when users specify a LLVM-specific, or otherwise unknown, feature name on the CLI. In those situations we request users to either replace it with a known Rust feature name (e.g. `bmi` -> `bmi1`) or file a feature request. I've a couple motivations for this: first of all, if users are specifying these features on the command line, I'm pretty confident there is also a need for these features to be usable via `#[cfg(target_feature)]` machinery. And second, we're growing a fair number of backends recently and having ability to provide some sort of unified-ish interface in this place seems pretty useful to me.
Sponsored by: standard.ai
If they are trying to use features rustc doesn't yet know about,
request a feature request.
Additionally, also warn against using feature names without leading `+`
or `-` signs.
LLVM really dislikes this and will assert, saying something along the
lines of:
```
rustc: llvm/lib/MC/MCSubtargetInfo.cpp:60: void ApplyFeatureFlag(
llvm::FeatureBitset&, llvm::StringRef, llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::SubtargetFeatureKV>
): Assertion
`SubtargetFeatures::hasFlag(Feature) && "Feature flags should start with '+' or '-'"`
failed.
```
The "CI" environment var isn't universal (for example, I think Azure
uses TF_BUILD). However, we are mostly concerned with rust-lang/rust's
own CI which currently is GitHub Actions which does set "CI". And I
think most other providers use "CI" as well.
Mark drop calls in landing pads `cold` instead of `noinline`
Now that deferred inlining has been disabled in LLVM (#92110), this shouldn't cause catastrophic size blowup.
I confirmed that the test cases from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/41696#issuecomment-298696944 still compile quickly (<1s) after this change. ~Although note that I wasn't able to reproduce the original issue using a recent rustc/llvm with deferred inlining enabled, so those tests may no longer be representative. I was also unable to create a modified test case that reproduced the original issue.~ (edit: I reproduced it on CI by accident--the first commit timed out on the LLVM 12 builder, because I forgot to make it conditional on LLVM version)
r? `@nagisa`
cc `@arielb1` (this effectively reverts #42771 "mark calls in the unwind path as !noinline")
cc `@RalfJung` (fixes#46515)
edit: also fixes#87055
Allow loading LLVM plugins with both legacy and new pass manager
Opening a draft PR to get feedback and start discussion on this feature. There is already a codegen option `passes` which allow giving a list of LLVM pass names, however we currently can't use a LLVM pass plugin (as described here : https://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html), the only available passes are the LLVM built-in ones.
The proposed modification would be to add another codegen option `pass-plugins`, which can be set with a list of paths to shared library files. These libraries are loaded using the LLVM function `PassPlugin::Load`, which calls the expected symbol `lvmGetPassPluginInfo`, and register the pipeline parsing and optimization callbacks.
An example usage with a single plugin and 3 passes would look like this in the `.cargo/config`:
```toml
rustflags = [
"-C", "pass-plugins=/tmp/libLLVMPassPlugin",
"-C", "passes=pass1 pass2 pass3",
]
```
This would give the same functionality as the opt LLVM tool directly integrated in rust build system.
Additionally, we can also not specify the `passes` option, and use a plugin which inserts passes in the optimization pipeline, as one could do using clang.
The resulting profile will include the crate name and will be stored in
the `--out-dir` directory.
This implementation makes it convenient to use LLVM time trace together
with cargo, in the contrast to the previous implementation which would
overwrite profiles or store them in `.cargo/registry/..`.
This commit works around a crash in LLVM when the
`-generate-arange-section` argument is passed to LLVM. An LLVM bug is
opened for this and the code in question is also set to continue passing
this flag with LLVM 14, assuming that this is fixed by the time LLVM 14
comes out. Otherwise this should work around debuginfo crashes on LLVM
13.
Initialize LLVM time trace profiler on each code generation thread
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D71059 LLVM 11, the time trace profiler was
extended to support multiple threads.
`timeTraceProfilerInitialize` creates a thread local profiler instance.
When a thread finishes `timeTraceProfilerFinishThread` moves a thread
local instance into a global collection of instances. Finally when all
codegen work is complete `timeTraceProfilerWrite` writes data from the
current thread local instance and the instances in global collection
of instances.
Previously, the profiler was intialized on a single thread only. Since
this thread performs no code generation on its own, the resulting
profile was empty.
Update LLVM codegen to initialize & finish time trace profiler on each
code generation thread.
cc `@tmandry`
r? `@wesleywiser`
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D71059 LLVM 11, the time trace profiler was
extended to support multiple threads.
`timeTraceProfilerInitialize` creates a thread local profiler instance.
When a thread finishes `timeTraceProfilerFinishThread` moves a thread
local instance into a global collection of instances. Finally when all
codegen work is complete `timeTraceProfilerWrite` writes data from the
current thread local instance and the instances in global collection
of instances.
Previously, the profiler was intialized on a single thread only. Since
this thread performs no code generation on its own, the resulting
profile was empty.
Update LLVM codegen to initialize & finish time trace profiler on each
code generation thread.
Cleanup LLVM multi-threading checks
The support for runtime multi-threading was removed from LLVM. Calls to
`LLVMStartMultithreaded` became no-ops equivalent to checking if LLVM
was compiled with support for threads http://reviews.llvm.org/D4216.
The support for runtime multi-threading was removed from LLVM. Calls to
`LLVMStartMultithreaded` became no-ops equivalent to checking if LLVM
was compiled with support for threads http://reviews.llvm.org/D4216.
